Helen and Hugo’s Organic Farming Blog

In Western Australia the Government’s plans to conduct trials on GM have been disallowed in the Upper House due to insufficient support being shown for non GM farmers. (23.04.09 Stock and Land, p 18)

Victory for the Network of Concerned farmers?

Not if the WA Minister for Agriculture Terry Redman has his way. He intends to sign an exemption order for the trials to go ahead! Just who is he representing?
And why conduct trials anyway? Surely not to prove that GM canola is better! Hasn’t that been “proved” in other state and countries? Would I dare suggest that it is just another strategy to gradually weaken and wear out people’s opposition to GM.

Just look at what is happening in Victoria where it has been announced this week that there will be no segregation of GM and non GM canola this year. Why? Only last year they said that concerned people had no worry about contamination because GM grains would be segregated from non GM. Now it seems that it doesn’t matter, thus exposing everyone who uses canola products to the effects, currently unknown, to GM. If you want a choice, bad luck and, by the way, they knew all along that it was impossible to stop GM canola from contaminating non GM farms. The quicker the better for all concerned who stand to gain from the technology.

This arrogant disregard of people’s wishes must be examined and everyone of us should write to our elected Government “representative” and ask why. Until the majority of politicians stand threatened to lose their seat there is no reason for them to challenge Party policy which is abundantly clear, does not represent us.

The article in The Age “Thornley blasts power bosses over coal use” (p.2 by Adam Morton
25.04.09) is spot on. The Victorian Government led by John Brumby seems more interested in
jobs for the boys than jobs for the people. Brumby’s lack of leadership in applying rational,
logical thinking that would serve to create long term solutions is starkly evident once again.


Thornley claims that coal should not be burnt but rather have the carbon extracted and burn
the gas. This way we would not only have carbon to sell for $1200 a tonne to India and China to use in water purification, we would cut emisssions by two thirds, save the equivalent of 2
desalination plants worth of water and double the number of coalminers jobs. Presently we are
getting nothing for the carbon and at best a negative $30 when there is a carbon price and
“killing the planet”.


Seems like simple and obvious arithmetic to me. Just like it is not to provide water by building an energy guzzling, environmentally disastrous, shortlived desalination plant or a pipe from the Goulburn River to supply Melbourne. The latter is nowhere near finished and already been
declared a failure! On top of that, the ratepayers are being told that they will carry the burden of these Government projects. When will the Government serve the people instead of lining the pockets of yet another mate’s company?


What we need are leaders who have vision and the courage to plan for our future and
to not bow to the self serving needs of big business. A great leader creates a sound future for all and enrols the people in making it happen. It has nothing to do with protecting entrenched views from people trying to protect their jobs and their ego. Nor is it about taking easy options.

“Greenpeace Wrong About GM farming” is one of 2 letters in Opinion, Stock and Land, 2.4.09 p. 10

It is written to make 2 organic farmers who are going from town town with Greenpeace look like misinformed, ignorant farmers spreading mistruths GM. They are riding “side saddle …pump(ing)
out loads of misinformation about litigation-prone agribusiness, compensation, seed supplies and other bulldust”

The writer, Wayne McKay of Billimari, NSW, says that they are “trying to whip up a fever of bother about GM canola” His proof that they missed their mark is that 1000 farmers, up from 100 farmers last year, have turned a “deaf ear to the doomsayers” because “Guess what? Farmers see through such stunts” Wayne’s last comment that these 2 farmers “have only demonstrated that their opposition to GM technology is stronger that their knowledge of farming”.

It amazes me that Wayne hasn’t stopped to realise how illogical his claims are.
Firstly the 1000 farmers were always going to plant GM canola because they see it as their best way to farm profitably. They are unaware of the benefits of biological farming and know no other way to farm apart from getting rid of weeds - competition - and adding inputs to make plants produce.

Secondly why would 2 organic farmers spend their time going around to the towns to oppose GM? Organic farmers do not need GM technology to grow their crops without weedicides so maybe these 2 farmers are extremely concerned about the future for all of us if GM crops are widely grown. They know that there is a better, healthier way to farm because they know their soils and look after them.

I am extremely grateful that people do take the time out to get the information out there. Due to the huge influence that the big agribusinesses can exert on our governing bodies and the media, it is difficult for the ordinary bloke to access a balanced stream of information.

One excellent source of current information is to be found at: www.madge.org.au

On the weekend Hugo and I went to support Gerhard Grasser of Agrisolutions man his stand at the Seymour Alternative Farming Expo. On Saturday Gerhard gave 2 talks about rapidly creating the soil recover due to drought and/or bushfires. During the 1st one he was interrupted several times by a man in the audience about reduced use of fertiliser in a biological farming system.
The man left early but appeared at his stand afterwards claiming in a loud voice that Gerhard was dishonest - nothing else - just dishonest. When I asked why, he had little to say except repeat his claims. When I asked again he said that Gerhard hadn’t detailed which soil testing labs. were independent but he said he knew that there was only one that was independent - Incitec!!!!! it was curious as he would not engage in discussion.

Hugo said that there was a similar incident on Sunday with another man just hanging around and proclaiming that Gerhard was dishonest.

On discussing it tonight Hugo thinks, and I agree, that both men were there to discredit anyone perceived to be a threat to chemical fertiliser companies. The 2nd man was touting how good GM cops were because they increased corn yields in 3rd world countries by 3%. Once again he would not engage in any discussion.

Just finished reading a review of philosopher Peter Singer’s new book “The Life You Can Save” subtitled “Acting Now To End World Poverty”. I was extremely interested to read more as it is a subject that I too have wrestled with and actively did what I could do about it for many years.

While you are reading this short piece, about 300 children will die, many from easily treatable, poverty-related causes?

(Based on UNICEF estimates that 27,000 children die every day)

These figures are hard to comprehend but nevertheless true.

In the past I have watched a short documentary, which was made about child mortality. To highlight the enormity of the figures, they showed that every few minutes this was the equivalent of a jumbo jet crashing every few minutes. I have never forgotten the parallel and am confronted when journalists highlight the tragic loss of a single life in our society and I ask “Why, when we can relate to one death can’t we relate to thousands every day?” I came to the conclusion that we just fell totally disempowered in the face of such enormous tragedy.

Singer in his book deals with this confrontation to find out why many of us do nothing to address this gross world imbalance. He is not seeking in this book to make us feel guilty or bad but essentially putting forward an argument to empower us as individuals to end poverty. This he suggests is unavoidable if we want to live an ethical life.

Singer argues that if you are reading his book and drinking bottled water or maybe a soft drink, then you have money to spend on things you don’t really need. He rightfully claims that around the world a billion people struggle to live each day on less than you paid for that drink.

So what to do to make a difference? Hugo and I chose to contribute to the Grameen Bank which in turn provides loans for the poorest of the poor to have access to credit and in turn end their own poverty. We came to understand as we lobbied our Federal Parliamentarians that our Australian Government aid programme is not designed to do this.

Singer suggests that we can all in fact make a difference and end extreme poverty by allocating small regular amounts to reputable non government agencies (such as Grameen, or Oxfam)

Singer continues to question the eating of meat and the biofuel industry which robs grain which could instead feed the world. He examines the enormous wealth squandered on lifestyle and philanthropic trusts set up to buy valuable art objects. Is it morally responsible to spend millions on 1 painting when the money spent could have saved thousands of lives?

I find the whole discussion provocative, empowering and timely and will buy the book to read more in depth.

The Age Sat 31^st Jan 2009 Features p. 12 - 13

WHY THE GM MORATORIUM SHOULD NOT BE LIFTED YET

It defies logic to allow large multinational companies to launch their products in Australia.
The only people who stand to gain from these products are the suppliers of them.
In fact the release of these products will cause increased expenditure for farmers:-
who will have to buy the product each year at non negotiable prices
who will see no long term increased productivity  and who will certainly see no profitability which will instead be enjoyed by suppliers.

The cost to Australia is enormous particularly as the new technology pays scant regard for the soil
microbiology, the environment or the long term future of agriculture

WHAT SHOULD OUR GOVERNMENT DO?
The government should be funding the development of sustainable farming practices.
It is a well known fact that the organics industry is the fastest sector of agriculture. It is not so well
known by those outside the industry of the benefits provided by farming organically.
All that GM promises – drought resistance, less weeds higher yields and better returns can be
delivered by organic farming – and more.
In fact organic farming can reduce water use by up to 70%, uses less fertilizers, uses no weedicides,
pesticides or harmful chemical drenches. It is an environmentally friendly practice which increases
the soil biology, the true foundation of farming healthily.

WHO AM I?
My name is Helen Disler and I have been working with farmers for over 30 years and helping them
farm more profitably and productively – the aim of all farmers. Over the years more and more
farmers have come to realize that there is more to farming than just adding fertilizers to increase
production. Farmers are realizing that it is getting the soil healthy is the key to productive and
profitable farming. They are keen to learn how to do this so that their farms are viable for future
generations. GM will do nothing to address this. In fact GM will only create more expenses
and problems for farmers to deal with. Farmers do not need to be squeezed any further.

PLEASE DELAY LIFTING THE BAN ON GM PRODUCTS

Show your support and make a comment!