Australian farmers signing up to grow genetically modified canola are exposing themselves to ''onerous'' obligations, an international law expert says. Duncan Currie says the contract between biotechnolgy firm Monsanto and GM canola growers bars farmers from selling their land to anyone without a Monsanto licensing agreement.
Monsanto described the claim as ''ridiculous''.
The contract, obtained by The Canberra Times, shows that if the land is sold up to two years after the agreement expires, contractual obligations are passed to the buyer, who could be liable for the former owner's contract breaches.
Monsanto reserves the right to take legal action against any farmers who possess its patented canola without a licensing agreement.
If GM canola is found, the land owner must prove whether its presence was intentional or due to inadvertent contamination.
Under the contract, farmers give Monsanto the right to ''inspect, take samples and test all of the grower's owned and/or leased fields and storage bins'' and to obtain copies of all operational documents for three years after they buy GM canola.
Mr Currie believes the implications for farmers are dire.
''In general this is a very one-sided agreement,'' he said.
''[One provision] is particularly onerous [and] includes liability for payment of Monsanto's legal and attorney fees, including expense incurred in enforcing Monsanto's rights and investigation expenses.'' ......
NSW and Victorian farmers are now harvesting Australia's first GM canola crops after a moratorium on GM crops was lifted in both states earlier this year.
The crops contain resistance to glyphosate, the active ingredient in many non-selective herbicides. A member of the Concerned Farmers Network, Donald McFarlane, said canola crops were hard to contain in one location.
''Farmers of canola will know that it's almost impossible to stop the spread of [canola] seed,'' he said.
''Every year, up to 13per cent of a crop will escape to end up god knows where.''
He was concerned if a farm sold land within three years of planting GM crops, the contract did not ensure the new owner would be trained to prevent crop contamination.
The NSW Farmers Association would not comment on deals between Monsanto and individual farmers.
Its president, Jock Laurie, advised farmers to seek legal advice before signing any contract, GM or otherwise.
Yet another thing that the former neo-conservative Howard Government and the majority of it's State Labor Government counterparts wished on the Australian people.
One has to wonder at the role of the Farmers Association in all this.
Given the fact that prime farmland within 100 kms of the Australian coastline and similar land on the fringes of inland towns and cities is often sold-on or developed for urban-rezoning to supply farmers with a retirement income (especially in areas such as the NSW North Coast), one has to wonder how prospective buyers will feel about inheriting a legal obligation to Monsanto.
Surely this will affect local agricultural property prices and how many 'treechangers' and seachangers' view property on offer.
Joint Select Committee report to Tasmanian Government on GMO seed, crops and food, August 2008, supporting a GM-free state.