Mr. Speaker, the concern of Canadians when it comes to genetically modified foods is legitimate and must be taken seriously.
There has been a flood of genetically engineered products on the market in the last number of years. Some 30 to 40 products are now available on the grocery shelf. Some 60% of processed foods contain genetically modified foods. Large numbers of acreage are taken up with genetically modified crops.
This is a very significant development in the history of this country and it certainly causes Canadians legitimate concern. This has all happened without much knowledge on the part of Canadians. These decisions were made by governments some years back. There was no public consultation process. There is no policy framework in place to deal with the long term effects of this kind of development in our society today.
We are told time and time again not to worry. We are told that genetically modified foods are substantially equivalent to non-genetically modified foods. We are told there is no need to worry. Don't worry, be happy as my colleague for Palliser has said. That is the message from the government. We are here today to try to change that.
It is not good enough to tell Canadians not to worry and that the government will take care of their interests. Canadians have been faced with too many examples in the past where governments have taken shortcuts and Canadians have paid the price.
If we have learned anything from the Walkerton water tragedy, it should be that there can be no shortcuts when it comes to the safety of the food we eat, the water we drink, the blood transfusions we may require, or the drugs that are necessary for our medical conditions. To do anything less is to put people at the whim of the marketplace without any guarantee of safety. As someone once said to me, it is playing Russian roulette with the lives of Canadians.
We in the NDP are saying the precautionary principle should be that products should only go on the market when they have been proven to be safe. That is what should guide us through all of the developments in biotechnology. We are saying that if the science is unavailable or has not been completed, then surely we should not allow things on the market unless we know they are safe.
It is time for the government to hear the message. It has a responsibility to prove safety and ensure that the companies prove safety as opposed to the individual Canadian consumer proving harm. What creates the possibility of serious problems and disastrous consequences is when precautionary steps have not been taken. That is what we are asking to be done when it comes to genetically engineered food.
I cannot stand here and say that genetically engineered food is unsafe. However, I can say with absolute certainty and authority based on everything I have read that no one can say that there will never be any deleterious effects from genetically engineered food.
We cannot say at this point that there will be no long term effects on human health, on soil conditions or on the state of our environment. We do not have the ability to say that because we do not have the science. In fact, we have all kinds of science which suggests otherwise.
All kinds of studies say there could be lethal effects from genetically modified seeds on insects such as the monarch butterfly. We know that Roundup resistant crops may result in increased residue to the consumer, possibly causing non-Hodgkins lymphoma. We know that genetically modified seeds could render antibiotics useless. We know from news as recently as today that genes used to modify crops can jump the species barrier and cause bacteria to mutate. We know from the recent example of the company Advanta based in Winnipeg that problems occur when seeds spread from one crop to another. That is causing all kinds of ramifications in the European market. It is having a major impact on farmers in this country today.
We are here today to say that when we do not know all the answers and we do not have the science then we have to do something. We have to take steps. There are some things we can do. One is suggested in the motion today. It has been suggested as well by the member for Louis-Hébert that we could at least begin with a labelling process. We could at least guarantee that consumers have the knowledge they need to decide whether or not to consume genetically engineered food.
In the best of all worlds if we had taken all the precautionary steps, had the science in place and made sure that we knew what we were dealing with, maybe that would not have been necessary. At least at this point in time when the horse is out of the barn, we should be doing that which consumers are expecting us to do and that which is absolutely essential given the changing nature of the field. We should give consumers the information they need to make a decision, give them the right to know and the right to make an informed choice.
That is certainly something that is elemental. It is basic and something the government should be doing immediately. It should not set up one more biotechnology committee, not create an illusion of consulting while it spends $25 million on fancy booklets trying to tell Canadians that everything is safe and fine.
Canadians want open consultation. They want to be involved in the decision making process. All of parliament wants to be part of this process because what is fundamentally at stake here is human health, environmental health and the future of our society.
Without exaggerating the point, let us simply say that in the absence of sufficient knowledge to answer all of those questions, let us not take any chances. Let us put human health first. Let us put public safety ahead of the needs of the industry. Let us ensure that with every step forward we provide consumers with the right to know and with the information they need in order to make informed decisions. Let us also ensure that from this day forward all of our decisions are based on independent scientific expertise.