By Steve Mbogo

The labelling of foods produced from genetic modified crops could be a
starting point of an agreement between people supporting introduction of
genetically modified (GM) foods and those opposed to it.
The raging debate is narrowing on the need to ensure that the law that
regulates importation and growing of GM foods protects consumers and
farmers.

?We are not opposed to biotechnology but we want the proposed law to have
safeguards for Kenyans,? said Sidney Quantia, the coordinator of the Kenya
Biodiversity Coalition, which is campaigning against the pro-GM Biosafety
Bill 2008.

The coalition said the law should make those growing and importing GM foods
to be liable in case the foods become harmful to people, animals and the
biodiversity. The coalition wants Parliament to instead debate the
Biotechnology and Biosafety Bill 2008, which they say offers this safeguards
because it was developed in a consultative process.

They said the new Bill does not give Kenyans the right to know on whether
what they consume has GM elements or not. ?It?s like the Government is
protecting the GM seed manufacturers and importers,? said Mr Quantai.

The Bill they say is similar to that which President Kibaki refused to
assent to last year after lobby groups poked holes into the law.

Agriculture minister William Ruto has since August emerged as the most vocal
GM technology supporter, much to the charging of activists who say this
reality means a policy decision by the Government to introduce GM foods.

Last month, the minister launched the National Biotechnology Awareness
Strategy that is meant to offer Kenyans accurate and reliable information
and knowledge about tissue culture, molecular breeding and genetic
modification.

The basis of the minister?s support is that there has not been evidence yet
to health and biodiversity problems from consumption or growing of GM foods.
But lobbyists here say they will soon release evidence to show how
consumption of GM foods in Kenya is contributing to rise of lifestyle
disease like cancer and diabetes. No scientific research before has however
linked GM foods to such diseases.

One of the sticking pints in the GM debate is that seeds developed through
this technology cannot be replanted after harvesting. This means farmers
must buy new seeds every planting season.

There are also specific pesticides used on GM crops. This is seen as being
adverse to the predominant smallholder and poor farmers in Kenya. It is seen
as a way to create ready market for GM seeds and chemical manufacturers.

However, an almost similar scenario happens when farmers plant hybrid seeds.
Although they can be replanted, the yields of these seeds after replanting
are less and agriculture extension officers usually encourage farmers to use
new seeds every planting season.

Another issue of contention is the call by anti-GM activists that farmers
should go organic farming, where natural methods and biodegradable inputs
are used to aid growth of crops.

Evidence however gathered from smallholder organic commercial farmers around
Nairobi and groups like Kenya Organic Agriculture Network indicates that
organic farming is equally expensive but has the advantage ensuring
conservation of biodiversity. Organic foods also fetch a premium retail
price, enabling farmers to earn more from their farms.

A decision on whether or not Kenya should accept GM technology like South
Africa, Egypt and Burkina Faso has raged for years, with international
anti-GM lobby groups and GM seeds and pesticide manufactures fighting proxy
wars through Kenyan non-profit groups.
www.checkbiotech.org