"Guidelines " for manipulation of Moter Nature

[oneoff]

I accept your opinion as a lawyer that there is no traction on applicant liability for Triffid. Your opinion and mine too, may or may not ever be confirmed on that particular point.
As a farmer I may have an opinion that Viterra and Cargill (as multinational parent companies ) will not lose a dime and may do very well because of this generic problem. I suspect that the dozens of very Canadian railway hopper cars on US railway tracks; pulled by Canadian Pacific engines are not out on a Christmas food bank drive.
It could be that Canadian flax is just taking a different route to Europe; or being exchanged for less stringently tested (as in fewer tests and maybe submitting samples from least likely problem spots; or maybe just using a test that was I'm told 10 times less sensitive a couple of months; just so the US can say they never have found a positive test. Thats hard to believe. However; thats all speculation; but there's always a grain of truth in even the wildest rumors. In late January; Ameriflax told me they had 150 some odd tests completed; and all were negative. She said they were done same way as Canadian tests If tests were done in Nov/Dec in Canada at 0.1 % level; maybe they decided no further tests were needed. In Canada we all know we are suckers for punishment; so we test for0.01% and continue till we find lots more..
Back to Cargill. As of late January; the people at the Cargill booth at Minot ND farm show were not at all concerned with Triffid or testing. ADM (Archer Daniels Midland) was not at all concerned with an affect on their company; or were scared of our contaminated Canadian flax. None of the elevator companies I talked too had any reservations. To be honest I heard second hand that Harvest States was on lookout for Triffid; but I never noticed their booth or you can bet I would have dropped by.
The local elevator at Max literally said "What's Triffid".

In summary; with opportunities of retail certified seed supplies; and ability to further lock production contracts in with credit arrangements for all inputs; and the ability to download all costs onto farmers; none of us (especially non-farmers) have any clue if Viterra and Cargill will end up with margins and volumes that have increased because of the Triffid incident. Thats my farmer opinion.

[oneoff]

Sometimes an apology and a change of attitude, along with reasonable damages can suffice as a solution to a no win situation. But if it is evident that the other party won't and can't respect you; then I might agree that at least they can fear you. In such situations; there is a need for the meanest lawyer in the land; with legal fees commensurate with what he can extract.

[oneoff]

cpallett One further comment. I note that the posted directive contains this statemnet "This is an updated Directive 2000-07 which include new changes and all previous amendments."


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That implies there were earlier versions. I haven't been able to locate the archives for CFIA; but as of now who who knows what ammendments and changes were in effect when Triffid was being approved.

[oneoff]

charliep Then I say above all else; lets be careful and sensible before we do anything irreversible. Lets do research in controlled, bio hazard environments. Lets not be satisfied with a cost/benefit ratio of unity or less. The risk/benefit ratio needs to be sustancial, the proponents have to be willing to be fully accountable, responsible and respectable. Not some faceless company that can be renamed by changing the INC. to LLB
It all boils down to respecting the positions of others; but when sure of your stance; at times having the strength to say to customers "no more appeasement" for a while we wish you well on your own. When you unintentially offend someone; and are at fault; then try to make ammends. Avoid as many avoidable mistakes as possible; and don't repeat the recent mistakes recorded in history. Be prepared to make ammends to those you unintentionally might significantly harm. Otherwise you are not yet ready to be entrusted with potentially life changing developments.

[parsley]

You noticed cott,.. a few of the begging parade of registered lobbyists lining the walls in Ottawa, some with seed legislation on their agenda?

[parsley]

This is the best guideline I can think of oneoff,:

Future events arriving from ag biotechnology will need a regulatory system that carefully evaluates proposed events, as oneoff has highlighted.

But farmers also need a system that manages those events carefully t oversee those nasty little surpriseds that pop up.

Farmers should expect information openly communicated about the liabilities, too, and there will be some, instead of directors and staff trying to hide or minimize information, or as now is common, ignore questions, and hide.

This past year, farmers watched the Pulse Growers NOT satisfactorily respond to the case of the missing laptop uploaded with farmers' private information.

The Triffid fiasco has been a textbook international shame.

Worse, in both cases, the farmer was made to feel as if HIS business .... was none of his business.

This is an attitude that has to change.

Farmers need fresh players. New directors. New staff that can solve problems openly and remember who pays their salaries, but more important, enforces rules.

The seedgrower who screws up, should automatically sit on the back landing for a few years.

Farmers need new faces they can trust, who will want to and be able to run a trustworthy organization. We have a few good old boys who need a kick in the ass on their way out the door. I hate being so diplomatic because the message may be too subtle for those who should read the message twice.

Wanted: Trustworthy and decent people. Best guidline I can muster. pars

[oneoff]

I think I agree. But is this headed for a class action lawsuit?. Is it worth the trouble to dedicate oneself to the many that don't realize you're doing it more for them than yourself?.

[cpallett]

oneoff,

I ask myself that question each and every day and the answer is always the same.

See www.bseclassaction.ca

Sometimes you just have to get off your keister and do what you know is right, notwithstanding the apathy or criticism from those you are trying to help, or the financial hardship trying to help may entail for you and your family. Otherwise, if you are not prepared to get off your keister to encourage change (read 'accountability in government to Canadian farm families' as my particular grail), you lose the right to complain. Perish the thought.

"All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing." And all that is necessary for negligence, buffoonery, incompetence and general lack of accountability to continue is for good men to find that it is not worth their trouble to take up the lance.

Whether it is worth the trouble or not is really not the issue. Is it really worth the trouble to continue farming in this socio-political and economic climate when you could always cash in on the land and move on to something more financially rewarding? Or is it something we just have to do? A moral imperative that is stapled to our spines? You bet.