Monsanto shows its desperation

Caught out in yet another instance of crop contamination and an attempt to limit the power of U.S. courts – this time an unapproved and commercially unreleased genetically modified wheat variety and a piece of legislation quietly slipped into an appropriations bill - Monsanto & Co decides to blame the bogeymen.

Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2013 containing the section known as the  “Monsanto Protection Act” or “Farmers Assurance Provision” 26 March 2013:

SEC. 735. In the event that a determination of non-regulated status made pursuant to section 411 of the Plant Protection Act H. R. 933—35 is or has been invalidated or vacated, the Secretary of Agriculture shall, notwithstanding any other provision of law, upon request by a farmer, grower, farm operator, or producer, immediately grant temporary permit(s) or temporary deregulation in part, subject to necessary and appropriate conditions consistent with section 411(a) or 412(c) of the Plant Protection Act, which interim conditions

shall authorize the movement, introduction, continued cultivation, commercialization and other specifically enumerated activities and requirements, including measures designed to mitigate or minimize potential adverse environmental effects, if any, relevant to the Secretary’s evaluation of the petition for non-regulated status, while ensuring that growers or other users are able to move, plant, cultivate, introduce into commerce and carry out other authorized activities in a timely manner: Provided, That all such conditions shall be applicable only for the interim period necessary for the Secretary to complete any required analyses or consultations related to the petition for non-regulated status: Provided further, That

nothing in this section shall be construed as limiting the Secretary’s authority under section 411, 412 and 414 of the Plant Protection Act.

Snopes 29 May 2013:

..the agribusiness industry…… maintains the Farmers Assurance Provision prevents activists from manipulating the court system.

Salon News 6 June 2013:

In bad news for Monsanto, but good news for food safety advocates, chairwoman of the Senate Agriculture Committee Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich., has vowed to oppose a provision that protects genetically modified seeds from litigation in the face of health risks. The provision, dubbed “the Monsanto Protection Act” by activists for the benefit it would provide biotech giants like Monsanto, was sneaked into a broad spending bill and passed through Congress without appropriate review by the Agricultural or Judiciary Committees…..

Stabenow made her pledge in a conversation with Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), who has been pushing the Senate to vote on an amendment to the farm bill that would repeal the provision. That vote was blocked by [Republican Sen. Cochran] and on Thursday morning the Senate voted to end debate and move to final passage.

When two senators have a pre-arranged public conversation on the Senate floor, it’s known as a colloquy and is typically the bow that ties up a deal struck beforehand. While Merkley was unable to get a repeal vote, the colloquy is a significant win for him, with Stabenow promising she will oppose any attempt to extend the Monsanto Protection Act in backroom negotiations.

Wisconsin Rapids Tribune 6 June 2013:

This week, more than 2 million people protested around the world against the corporate conglomerate Monsanto...

Drovers Cattle Network 6 June 2013:

Monsanto executives described the discovery of genetically-modified wheat growing in an Oregon farmer’s field this spring an “isolated occurrence.”

During a conference call with reporters on Wednesday, Monsanto officials said the company has tested 31,200 seed samples in Oregon and Washington since the May 29 announcement of the GM wheat sprouts. They found no evidence of contamination in the tests, and said the GM wheat found last month was likely the result of an accident or deliberate mixing of seeds. They are not ruling out sabotage….

The Christian Science Monitor 7 June 2013:

American wheat farmers and a food safety advocacy group filed a lawsuit Thursday against biotech seed developer Monsanto Co, accusing the company of failing to protect the U.S. wheat market from contamination by its unauthorized wheat.

The petition, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington, seeks class-action status to represent other farmers it says were harmed by lower wheat prices as some foreign buyers have shied away from U.S. wheat.

It names Clarmar Farms Inc., farmer Tom Stahl, and the Center for Food Safety as plaintiffs…….

The suit follows a similar action filed Monday by a Kansas wheat farmer, alleging that he and other growers have been hurt financially by the discovery of an unapproved biotech wheat that Monsanto said it stopped testing and shelved nine years ago….

Background

Centre For Food Safety 20 May 2011:

Earthjustice attorney Paul Achitoff: “Dismissal of the appeal confirms that the district court rightly concluded that in this case, as in every other case that has challenged USDA’s oversight of genetically engineered crops, the agency has flouted the law, favoring the interests of Monsanto over those of American people.  With every court decision the need for fundamental reform in this area becomes ever more obvious.”

Remarkably, the EIS is only the second USDA has undertaken for any GE crop in over 15 years of approving such crops for human consumption.  Both analyses were court-ordered.  USDA said it expects to finish the GE sugar beets EIS and have a new decision on commercialization in 2012.

Despite the absence of lawful review or a new agency decision, in summer 2010, USDA and the biotech industry demanded the court allow planting to continue unabated.  The district court refused to do so and instead set aside USDA’s approval of the crop based on the agency’s failure to comply with environmental laws.  That precedential ruling was also preserved by today’s order.

Liberal Party's Mandurah Branch was having sacked shock jock Howard Sattler front their 13 July 2013 campaign fundraiser. So who was the lucky candidate?

Radio 6PR statement regarding Howard Sattler, 14 June 2013:

During an interview on the Drive program yesterday presenter Howard Sattler pursued a line of questioning with Prime Minister Julia Gillard that was disrespectful to the office and the person of the Prime Minister and was entirely inappropriate. 

Radio 6PR apologises unreservedly to Ms Gillard and Mr Mathieson for allowing these matters to be raised on the Drive Program. 

In the wake of yesterday's interview Radio 6PR suspended Mr Sattler from broadcasting pending a review of the matter today. The station has now decided to terminate Mr Sattler's engagement.

On the same day that Sattler was sacked it came to light that he had an association with the Liberal Party of Australia.

https://www.facebook.com/MandurahLiberals/photos_stream

So who was the Mandurah Branch of the Liberal Party raising money for? Its sitting Federal MP Don Randall in the Canning electorate or its candidate Donna Gordin in the Brand electorate?

Whichever one it was, apparently the event has now  been cancelled according to @SpottyBalfour who states he/she phoned to enquire on 14 June and was so informed.

A fact the mainstrean media picked up later the same day.

Looking at the world through a camera lens

Debrah Novak Media Services & Photography www.debrahnovak.com.au

Quote of the Week

“Gillard could walk on water and it would be reported that she failed to swim.” {The Australian Independent Media Network 8^th June 2013}

Australian Opposition Leader Tony Abbott and the rest of the Federal Coalition didn't do their homework on one asylum seeker

Sayed Abel Latif and his family sought asylum in Australia in May 2012.

The Australian stated on 3 June 2013:

It is understood Latif was one of 107 defendants in the "returnees from Albania" trial, held by an Egyptian military court in 1999.

So named because several of the defendants had been repatriated, or "rendered", from Albania, where they had allegedly been engaged in extremist activities, the case levelled an array of charges, including assassination of top political figures, involvement in the 1997 Luxor massacre and the bombing of banks and embassies….

[he was]  one of dozens convicted in absentia….

Refugee Action Coalition spokesman Ian Rintoul said Latif denied all the charges against him and some of the evidence used to convict him had been obtained through torture.

Between 4-6 June 2013 Australian Opposition Leader Tony Abbott and other members of the Coalition asked questions without notice in the House of Representatives using words to the effect that ‘A convicted Jihadist terrorist was kept for almost 12 months behind a pool fence’ while being held in an Australian detention centre’.

Seven days later ……..

Snapshot taken 8.20am 14 June 2013

http://www.interpol.int/Wanted-Persons/(wanted_id)/2001-43523

13 June 2013 - Media release

Egypt drops premeditated murder charge from Abdel Latif Red Notice

Statement by INTERPOL General Secretariat headquarters, Lyon, France

On 13 June 2013, INTERPOL’s National Central Bureau (NCB) in Cairo asked that the Red Notice previously issued at its request for Sayed Abdel Latif on 1 October 2001 be changed to remove any charges relating to premeditated murder, destruction of property, and possession of firearms, ammunition and explosives without a permit.

The remaining offences listed on the current valid Red Notice for Mr Abdel Latif are for membership of an illegally-formed extremist organization and forging travel documents for the organization’s members.

Egypt’s original 2001 Red Notice request stated that Mr Abdel Latif had been convicted and sentenced, in absentia, for premeditated murder, destruction of property, possession of firearms, ammunition and explosives without a permit, membership of a terrorist group and forgery of documents.

Based on the above, a Red Notice for Mr Abdel Latif was issued by INTERPOL's General Secretariat on 1 October 2001 for a variety of offences, including premeditated murder.

As required by INTERPOL’s rules on maintaining information in its databases, on 29 January 2007 and again on 24 October 2011, INTERPOL’s NCB Cairo requested that the Red Notice for Mr Abdel Latif remain valid and active for the same charges as originally requested.

Therefore, any law enforcement authority consulting INTERPOL'S databases between 1 October 2001 and 13 June 2013 would have read and believed that Mr Abdel  Latif was wanted for arrest by Egyptian authorities for a variety of terrorist-related offences, including premeditated murder.

Questions have recently been raised in relation to Mr Abdel Latif’s convictions as stated by Egyptian authorities in their original Red Notice application.

In following up on the matter with NCB Cairo, the NCB asked INTERPOL'S General Secretariat to remove the charge of premeditated murder and the other charges as outlined above.

INTERPOL immediately implemented NCB Cairo’s request and is advising all member countries accordingly.

All further enquiries on this case and on the underlying charges against Mr Abdel Latif should be directed to INTERPOL’s National Central Bureau in Cairo and to the Egyptian authorities.

Red Notices are one of the ways in which INTERPOL informs its 190 member countries that an arrest warrant has been issued for an individual by the competent authorities of a member country or by an international tribunal. It is not an international arrest warrant.

INTERPOL cannot insist that any member country arrest the subject of a Red Notice.

It seems all it took was for enquiries by The Guardian  and others, to be made of the Egyptian authorities and/or lawyers, for the truth began to emerge concerning this asylum seeker’s status.

Pity Tony Abbott and his cohorts didn’t make such enquiries.

UPDATE:

Interpol has now added this information to the Sayed Abel Latif  Red Notice - 
Charges: Membership in a terrorist group and providing forged travel documents

This description differs markedly from that contained in the Interpol media release which clearly stated: membership of an illegally-formed extremist organization and forging travel documents for the organization’s members.

A suspicious mind would have to consider the possibility that the higher echelons of the Australian Federal Police have applied some pressure to Interpol in order to rescue their somewhat tattered reputations in this matter.

Is the Liberal Party finally leaving the Metgasco building?

Metgasco Limited website 10 June 2013:

Richard Shields - External Relations Manager

Richard has extensive knowledge and experience in politics, having worked for almost 20 years in senior government, party related and private sector roles. He understands the challenges and complexities of the legislative and regulatory processes of government, in addition to having a strong insight into managing media and community relations.

Prior to joining Metgasco, Richard served as Deputy Director of the Liberal Party of Australia (NSW Division) for over 3 years and also served as the Interim State Director. Other positions held by Richard include a Policy Adviser to former Senator the Hon Helen Coonan as Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts.

Richard has also worked as a Senior Cnsultant [sic] for two of Australia's largest issues management firms. Drawing on his strong media and stakeholder manageent [sic] skills, Richard advises the Managing Director and Board on issues management, communications and engagement strategies and investor relations……

Insurance Business 10 June 2013:

The Insurance Council of Australia has appointed Richard Shields as general manager of government and stakeholder relations, effective 17 June, 2013.

He will be responsible for managing key stakeholder relationships and engaging with all levels of government.

Shields has two decades of experience in public affairs-related roles. He was most recently the external relations manager of ASX-listed company Metgasco.

Prior to that he was an adviser to the Minister for Sport and Tourism Hon Andrew Thomson MP and for Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts Senator the Hon Helen Coonan; public affairs director for the Australian Hotels Association (WA); deputy state director and director of party affairs for the Liberal Party (NSW).

ICA CEO Rob Whelan said Shields brought an insider’s knowledge of the challenges and complexities of politics to the ICA. He said Shields would also complement the organisation’s knowledge of the legislative and regulatory processes of government……

Laughing at Tony Abbott's exaggerations

Australian Opposition Leader Tony Abbott’s  media release of 23 March 2012:

In exactly 100 days, the world’s biggest carbon tax will commence.

Abbott again on 8 July 2012:

And at the moment this is the world's biggest carbon tax at the worst possible time.

This was KieraGorden’s response in 2013:

Taxing Energy Use: A Graphical Analysis, 28 January 2013: Executive Summary excerpt:

Based on statutory rates in effect on 1 April 2012, overall effective tax rates on energy (Figure 1) range from EUR 0.18 per GJ in Mexico (not taking into account the variable rate component of its fuel excise tax, which has been negative in recent years) to EUR 6.58 per GJ in Luxembourg, with a simple average for all OECD countries of EUR 3.28 per GJ and a weighted average of EUR 1.77 per GJ. Meanwhile, effective tax rates on carbon range from EUR 2.80 per tonne ofCO2 in Mexico to EUR 107.28 per tonne of CO2 in Switzerland, with a simple average for all OECD countries of EUR 52.04 per tonne of CO2 and a weighted average of EUR 27.12 per tonne of CO2.

The highest overall effective tax rates tend to be in European countries, where energy-tax policy is significantly shaped by the 2003 European Union Energy Taxation Directive, which sets minimum tax rates for a variety of energy commodities. Many of the countries with the highest effective tax rates on carbon are countries with explicit carbon taxes (e.g. Denmark, Iceland, Ireland, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland). Explicit carbon taxes generally exist alongside other taxes on energy products, which are sometimes based on the energy content of different fuels. These countries tend to tax a broad range of energy products and to have more consistency in rates across different fuels and uses, particularly with respect to heating and process use.

Many Central European and Asian OECD member countries (e.g. the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Japan, Korea, Poland, the Slovak Republic, Turkey) tend to have lower effective tax rates on carbon than the countries mentioned above. The lowest effective tax rates on carbon are found in Australia, New Zealand and the Americas (Chile, Canada, Mexico and the United States). These last countries typically only tax fuels used in transport and generally do so at lower rates than the OECD average (an exception being at the provincial level in Canada. [my bolding]

International Energy Agency Energy Prices And Taxes Quarterly Statistics Fourth Quarter 2012:

Real Energy Prices for Households (total energy) in OECD countries, Third Quarter 2012

United Kingdom 136.4

New Zealand 127.1

Germany 126.7

United States 124.6

Japan 115.1

Australia 110.9

Canada 110.6

Real Energy Prices for Households and Industry (total energy) in OECD countries, Third Quarter 2012

United Kingdom 129.1

Germany 128.5

Japan 119.6

New Zealand 118.9

United States 117.4

Australia 117.1

Canada 104.4

Note: The "Real" price index is computed from prices in national currencies and divided by the country specific

 producer price index for the industrial sector and by the consumer price index for the household sector.

** Carbon Pricing came into effect in Australia in the Third Quarter 2012