![[APACHE DOCUMENTATION]](../images/sub.gif)
These configuration parameters control the core Apache features, and are always available.
       |
St. Louis, Missouri, July 15, 1999 Robert Rose, Carol Woodcock The Week Ahead, St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Sunday May 23, 1999 Monsanto vs. the Monarch, St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Sunday, May 23, 1999 In Meeting Here, Farm Group Looks To The Future, St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Monday May 24, 1999 US Farmers Ask Greenspan Fight Commodity Deflation, REUTERS Via Yahoo BizNews, Monday May 24, 1999 Glickman Says U.S., EU Should Tone Down Rhetoric, REUTERS Via Yahoo BizNews, Monday May 24, 1999 U.S. Aims For Lower Farm Tariffs In World Talks, REUTERS Via Yahoo BizNews, Monday May 24, 1999 Consumers Want More From Food - Marketing Expert, REUTERS Via Yahoo BizNews, Monday May 24, 1999 USDA Mulling Lamb Meat Purchases Glickman, REUTERS Via Yahoo BizNews, Monday May 24, 1999 Food Labeling Is Seen As A Way To Win Support For Genetically Altered Foods, St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Tuesday May 25, 1999 Task Force Ponders Whether to put Genetically Altered Foods on Labels, The Associated Press State & Local Wire, Tuesday May 25, 1999 Short Cuts/Ziff-Davis Eyes Merger Or Sale Of Market Unit, Newsday (New York, NY), Tuesday May 25, 1999 Shipley Threatens US Over Tariffs, The Evening Post (Wellington), Tuesday May 25, 1999 Some Momentum For Ag Export Subsidy Cuts - US Aide, REUTERS Via Yahoo BizNews, Tuesday May 25, 1999 Farm Forum Offers Preview Of WTO Talks, REUTERS Via Yahoo BizNews, Tuesday May 25, 1999 Scientists Debate How To Get Biotech Accepted, St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Wednesday May 26, 1999 Young & Rubicam Brand Futures Group Conducts Global Audit On Food Trends, M2 PRESSWIRE, Wednesday May 26, 1999 Biotech Concerns Dominate World Ag Forum Meeting, REUTERS Via Yahoo BizNews, Wednesday May 26, 1999 Scientific Review Sought For Genetically Altered Foods, Journal of Commerce, Thursday, May 27, 1999 Genetic Engineering: Industry Seeks Science Review, The National Journal Group, Inc. Greenwire, Friday, May 28, 1999 Farm Leader Urges Fed: Dont Raise Rates, REUTERS Via NewsEdge, Friday, May 28, 1999 Cargill Chairman Forecasts a Segregated Grain Industry, Doanes Agricultural Report (St. Louis, MO), Friday, May 28, 1999 World Agricultural Forum, Doanes Agricultural Report (St. Louis, MO), Friday, May 28, 1999 World Agricultural Forum, Doanes Agricultural Report (St. Louis, MO), Friday, May 28, 1999 NO SALE: Biotech Crop Boosters Learn No One's Buying, THE PANTAGRAPH (Bloomington, IL), Friday, Sunday, May 30, 1999 Global Financial Status No Longer Seen as Crisis, High Plains Journal (Dodge City, KS), Saturday, May 31, 1999 Genetic Modification in Food Production Stirs Clash, Daily Times Herald (Carroll, IA), Saturday, May 31, 1999 Forum Offers Preview of WTO Issues, Illinois Agri-News (La Salle, IL), June 4, 1999 Cargill: GMOs Will Require Segregation, Indiana Agri-News (Indianapolis, IN), June 4, 1999 Industry Looks for Answers to Europes GMO Issue, High Plains Journal (Dodge City, KS), June 7, 1999 Farmer No More A Sack Of Potatoes, FT Asia Intelligence Wire, Wednesday, June 9, 1999 Glickman Announces Exemption of Food, Medicine From Trade Sanctions, Midamerica Farmer Grower (Perryville, MO), Friday, June 11, 1999 The Long View, CNN Interactive World Wide Web Edition, June 28, 1999 The St. Louis Post-Dispatch Sunday May 23, 1999 The Week Ahead The World Agricultural Forum convenes Monday and Tuesday at the Hyatt Regency Hotel at Union Station. In attendance will be agriculture ministers from around the world, chief executives of agricultural companies and leading farm researchers. St. Louis Post-Dispatch Sunday, May 23, 1999 Monsanto vs. the Monarch The news that monarch butterfly caterpillars die after eating pollen from bioengineered corn raises, once again, two profound issues. The first is scientific: How can we determine the real threats to insects, plants and people from biotechnology? The second is, properly, political: How can we non-scientists participate fully in assessing risks and benefits, determining the tradeoffs we will accept and then guiding the development and use of biotechnological advances? These are not new issues, but the image of monarch butterflies succumbing to killer corn is a powerful catalyst for public debate. And both are now proxies that illustrate and illuminate public anxiety about biotechnology. We love monarchs and want them to flit through our lives. We dont want killer corn. As much as 25 million of the 80 million acres used to raise corn in the United States are being planted this season with Bt corn. The Bt stands for Bacillus thuringiensis, a bacterium that produces a toxin that kills corn borers. Monsanto Co., Novartis Agribusiness Biotechnology and Pioneer Hi-Bred International Inc., among others, have learned how to transfer the gene for the Bt toxin from the bacterium into corn. A team of researchers at Cornell University fed milkweed leaves to monarch caterpillars. Half the caterpillars who ate leaves coated with Bt pollen from Novartis corn died within four days. None of the caterpillars died who ate leaves coated with ordinary corn pollen, or with no pollen at all. The main food monarchs eat is milkweed. Half the nations monarch population lives in the Midwest Corn Belt during the time corn is producing pollen. Pollen can spread on the wind. Spokespeople for Monsanto and for the National Corn Growers Association, also headquartered in St. Louis, have begun the counterattack. Bt proponents question whether the laboratory application of pollen can be compared to its natural distribution. They argue over the percentage contribution of killer corn to monarch mortality. They insist that wind-borne Bt pollen is less dangerous than heavy applications of chemical insecticides. In the best tradition of science, these arguments should be carried out. The Cornell research should be challenged, confirmed or contradicted by others. But meanwhile, this nation is planting Bt corn unabated and learning on our European trade partners to buy bioengineered seed corn from Monsanto and other suppliers. The lessons of asbestos and tobacco are clear. We can no longer allow companies to get away with merely attacking scientific studies about the safety of their products. We must find a way for disinterested parties to assess the science and the risk with substantial public involvement in terms of learning, dealing with anxiety and making sound public policy. Today through Tuesday, senior agricultural officials from government, universities and agribusiness will convene in St. Louis at the first World Agriculture Congress, under the chairmanship of former U.S. Sen. John C. Danforth. Its sessions on technology and sustainability, set for Tuesday morning, should address these issues with candor and forthrightness. Meanwhile, Monsanto cant shrug off as mere technophobes those who decry killer corn or its soon-to-be-acquired infertile "terminator" seed technology. And it will not prevail merely by dint of regulatory approval and lobbying legislatures and executive agencies. It must engage the public here, in Europe and around the globe, squarely and fairly. It must speak. And it must listen. The answer does not lie in litigation or lobbying. In other words, Monsanto has got to stop acting like a company run by a lawyer - which it is - and start acting like a company that understands not only its public obligations but also its own interests. It needs public relationships, not public relations. It can still make heaps of money if its technology is as good as it says it is. The only risk to the bottom line will be if it isnt. In which case, a whole lot more than money will be lost. Return to the indexThe St. Louis Post-Dispatch Monday May 24, 1999 In Meeting Here, Farm Group Looks To The Future By Tim O'Neil More than 300 people from food companies, universities, policy organizations and governments are meeting downtown today to talk about providing more and better food for the world's growing population. Among the participants at the forum are the agricultural ministers or representatives from eight other countries in addition to the United States. Among the subjects they will discuss are estimates of the future needs of food, technological advances and trade restrictions.
REUTERS Via Yahoo BizNews Monday May 24, 1:06 pm Eastern Time US Farmers Ask Greenspan Fight Commodity DeflationST. LOUIS, May 24 (Reuters) - The president of the United States' largest farm group urged Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan on Monday to take action to reverse a downward spiral in world commodity prices. In a speech at the World Agricultural Forum, American Farm Bureau President Dean Kleckner praised Greenspan and the Federal Reserve Board for keeping inflation low. ``But folks, we're now facing commodity price deflation and I think only Greenspan can put a stop to this downward spiral,'' Kleckner said. ``Commodity prices everywhere are at or near record lows.'' The Fed's emphasis on maintaining low interest rates ``has been a good plan of attack,'' Kleckner said. But the Fed should now act to stabilize commodity prices ``by using gold and other commodity prices as a benchmark to set monetary policy,'' Kleckner said. The U.S. farm leader also urged Greenspan to use his power of persuasion to push Congress and world leaders to pursue tax policies that will help boost commodity prices. Return to the indexREUTERS Via Yahoo BizNews Monday May 24, 2:11 pm Eastern Time Glickman Says U.S., EU Should Tone Down RhetoricST. LOUIS, May 24 (Reuters) - U.S. Agriculture Secretary Dan Glickman said on Monday both sides should tone down their rhetoric in a beef trade dispute that has the United States on the verge of imposing punitive duties on $202 million worth of European Union goods. In a speech to the World Agricultural Forum, Glickman said that the United States would not back away from its insistence that the EU open its market to beef from hormone-treated cattle. But a solution may be easier to reach if both Washington and Brussels ``tone down'' their recent tough talk on the issue, he said. After the speech, Glickman told reporters that he did not want the beef hormone dispute to become a defining trade issue between the United States and Europe. However, he acknowledged that merely adopting a softer tone might not persuade Europe to open its market before the retaliatory duties are scheduled to go into effect in mid-July. The United States remains willing to discuss an interim compensation package with the European Union, as well as a labeling scheme that would allow European consumers to decide for themselves whether to buy the U.S. meat products, he said. Issues such as the beef hormone dispute and concerns over genetically-modified crops could complicate the next round of world agricultural trade negotiations that are scheduled to begin in late November, Glickman said. Those issues are more difficult to address than typical trade agenda items such as tariffs, export subsidies and domestic support programs. Another complicating factor for world trade talks could be low commodity prices which may make some nations more reluctant to adopt trade reforms, Glickman said. Return to the indexREUTERS Via Yahoo BizNews Monday May 24, 5:40 pm Eastern Time U.S. Aims For Lower Farm Tariffs In World TalksBy Doug Palmer ST. LOUIS, May 24 (Reuters) - A top U.S. priority for the next round of world trade talks will be reducing agricultural import tariffs that average more than 50 percent around the world, U.S. Agriculture Secretary Dan Glickman said on Monday. In a speech to the World Agricultural Forum, Glickman said the United States would use the upcoming talks to push for a ``rules-based world trading system...where food and fiber are passed freely across continents and borders.'' But Glickman acknowledged that the ambitious U.S. agenda could face considerable opposition. ``There are many powerful voices around the world that see agricultural trade not as a win-win situation, but a zero sum gain: the exporter wins and the importer looses,'' he said. In the last round of world trade talks, countries agreed to replace quotas and other import barriers with tariffs. That was viewed as a major step toward freer trade because tariffs are theoretically less restrictive than quotas, which limit imports to a specific amount. Tariffs are also considered more ``transparent'' than some other trade barriers, making it easier for traders to judge whether it's possible to make sales to a particular market. Even so, many agricultural tariffs are so high that they effectively block all imports. While the United States has relatively low agricultural import tariffs, the world average is above 50 percent, compared to about four percent for industrial goods. Agriculture and trade ministers from the more than 130 member nations of the World Trade Organization will meet in November to begin a new round of talks on farm, services and other trade sectors. In addition to cutting tariffs, another top U.S. priority for those negotiations is the elimination of agricultural export subsidies, Glickman said. Such subsidies not only distort trade, but they can be particularly damaging to developing nations by making it more difficult for them to compete in world markets, he said. U.S. trade negotiators have set a goal of completing the upcoming trade talks in three years. The last round began in Uruguay in 1986 and was finally completed in 1995. Despite the ambitious U.S. timetable, Glickman said the next round of talks could be difficult because of currently weak commodity prices that heighten protectionist impulses. Also, emerging biotechnology issues like establishing trading rules for genetically-modified crops will probably be harder to negotiate than traditional farm trade agenda items like reducing tariffs or export subsidies, he said. Another U.S. goal for the upcoming talks is imposing new disciplines on state-trading enterprise, such as the Canadian Wheat Board and the New Zealand Dairy Board. The United States also supports expanding -- and eventually eliminating -- tariff rate quotas, which are used by some countries to restrict market access, Glickman said. ``And we must ensure the continued effectiveness of the rules covering sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) measures so that science prevails and nations cannot mask protectionism behind invalidated, secretive studies,'' Glickman said. The so-called SPS agreement was a hallmark of the Uruguay Round trade pact by imposing scientific disciplines on measures to protect human, animal and plant life and health from foreign pests, diseases and contaminants. The agreement has been key to U.S. efforts to force the European Union to open its market to beef from cattle treated with artificial growth hormones. The EU has banned such beef since 1989, despite decades of scientific testing that shows the beef is safe. Return to the indexREUTERS Via Yahoo BizNews Monday May 24, 6:10 pm Eastern Time Consumers Want More From Food - Marketing ExpertST. LOUIS, Mo., May 24 (Reuters) - Finicky consumers in some parts of the world are demanding foods that make them look younger, feel happier and sleep more soundly, an international marketing expert said Monday. Marian Salzman, chief strategist at marketing and communications firm Young & Rubicam Inc. (NYSE:YNR - news), told a gathering of world agricultural executives here that consumer demands are rapidly evolving into new challenges and opportunities for producers. ``Market specialization is becoming increasingly significant'' as pockets of local preferences grow more varied, Salzman told the World Agricultural Forum. In Europe, for instance, research has identified groups of technologically savvy consumers who increasingly expect their food to have specific medicinal or nutritional benefits, Salzman said. Consumer desires go as far as demands for foods that can reduce signs of aging, improve psychological well-being and induce sleep, along with other results typically associated with pharmaceutical products. ``If they could sniff it and get all of the flavor and none of the calories, that would be even better,'' she said. ``We expect better living through better chemistry.'' In Japan, research shows a trend toward easy-to-prepare fast foods, but consumers still strongly prefer organic products, and genetically engineered foods are considered ``taboo,'' Salzman said. In a separate address at the agricultural forum, Ganesh Kishore, president of Monsanto Co.'s (NYSE: MTC - news) nutrition sector, underscored how the genetic modification of certain foods can have a direct impact on health problems. Within the next 15 years, he said, genetically modified crops should be able to produce food products to treat cancer, infectious diseases and cardiovascular problems. As one example, he cited Monsanto's development of a mustard oil rich in Vitamin A that is seen as useful in combating blindness and other ills commonly found in developing nations. Return to the index
REUTERS Via Yahoo BizNews Monday May 24, 6:35 pm Eastern Time USDA Mulling Lamb Meat Purchases GlickmanST. LOUIS, May 24 (Reuters) - The U.S. Agriculture Department is considering purchasing lamb meat to help boost prices for domestic producers, U.S. Agriculture Secretary Dan Glickman said on Monday. But Glickman declined to say whether the Clinton administration would restrict lamb imports from Australia and New Zealand, as the U.S. industry has requested. ``The president has to decide that,'' he told reporters after a speech to the World Agricultural Forum. Earlier this year, the U.S. International Trade Commission determined that low-priced imports from Australia and New Zealand threatened to harm the domestic industry. Because of that ruling, President Bill Clinton has until June 4 to decide whether to curb lamb imports. Australia and New Zealand supply virtually all of U.S. lamb imports. U.S. lamb producers have asked for a two-tiered tariff-rate quota to restrict imports and boost domestic prices. But last week, Australian Deputy Prime Minister Tim Fischer said any U.S. restriction would be unjustified because both Australia and New Zealand are free traders in lamb. The Agriculture Department can buy lamb for its domestic feeding programs if it determines there is a surplus. Department analysts are looking at that issue now, an aide to Glickman said. Return to the indexThe St. Louis Post-Dispatch Tuesday May 25, 1999 Food Labeling Is Seen As A Way To Win Support For Genetically Altered Foods By Robert Steyer A federal task force is expected to report by the end of July on whether the nation's food labeling laws should be revised to reflect generally engineered crops, top U.S. agriculture officials said Monday in St. Louis. Glickman repeated his willingness to impose tariffs on European Union goods worth $202 million, replying to the EU's refusal to accept imports of U.S. hormone-treated beef. Glickman said he is moving to seek World Trade Organization approval for the tariffs, which could be in place by July. But as nasty as this fight has become, Glickman warned that disputes over bioengineered crops "could make beef hormones look like the minor leagues." Labeling and separating genetically modified food from traditional food is the best way to offer a choice and to neutralize opposition and suspicion. "Once consumers are scared, especially on safety grounds, it takes a long time to win their confidence to try new things," he said. Return to the indexThe Associated Press State & Local Wire May 25, 1999, Tuesday, AM cycle Task force ponders whether to put genetically altered foods on labels ST. LOUIS, Mo., A federal task force is expected to give its opinion by late July on whether genetically altered ingredients should be identified on food labels, U.S. Agriculture Secretary Dan Glickman said. Glickman stressed that there has been no change in the government's position that food should be labeled only if ingredients change the nutritional content or could cause allergies. Glickman was the keynote speaker at the first World Congress, organized by the World Agricultural Forum, a St. Louis-based organization created by scientists, educators and executives. He told the audience that companies must temper the wonders of science with the concerns of consumers. "My confidence in biotechnology and the industry's confidence in biotechnology are ultimately irrelevant if the consumers aren't buying," Glickman said Monday. "We can't force-feed GMOs (genetically modified organisms) to reluctant consumers. We have to bring them along. The public opinion poll is as important as the test tube." He added that a greater embrace by consumers doesn't weaken the federal government's demand for strict scientific standards in evaluating food for domestic and foreign use. "Nations can't mask protectionism with unevaluated, secret studies," he said. "We have to have rules-based trade." The federal task force is one of the strategies being tried by government agencies to reinforce domestic support for crop biotechnology and win over skeptics. The task force's deliberations come at a time when opposition to genetically altered foods - among consumers, food companies and politicians is accelerating overseas, especially in Europe. St. Louis-based Monsanto Co. has been a leader in genetically engineered crops. The food label task force, which was activated six weeks ago, includes representatives from the Agriculture Department, Food and Drug Administration, State Department, Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Trade Representative's office, said Isi A. Siddiqui, special assistant for trade to Glickman. Domestic critics say biotech foods should be labeled to give consumers a choice. The food and biotechnology industries criticize that proposal as expensive and unnecessary. But several European and Asian nations are implementing or proposing labeling laws that would distinguish foods containing genetically modified ingredients. Some food companies overseas, especially in Great Britain, say they won't sell food with bioengineered ingredients. "It's clear that labeling can be a sensible way of providing information, but we have to make sure that the labeling is responsible," Glickman said. Labeling is only one of the disputes between the United States and a growing number of countries, especially the 15-nation European Union, that threaten to erupt into an agricultural trade war. Glickman repeated his willingness to impose tariffs on European Union goods worth $ 202 million, replying to the EU's refusal to accept imports of U.S. hormone-treated beef. Glickman said he is moving to seek World Trade Organization approval for the tariffs, which could be in place by July. But as nasty as this fight has become, Glickman warned that disputes over bioengineered crops "could make beef hormones look like the minor leagues." In a related development, Glickman said that next month he will select a 25-member committee to counsel his department on how biotechnology affects issues ranging from trade to small farms. This permanent committee, whose formation was announced in March, will include consumer advocates, environmentalists, scientists, corporate executives and farmers. Return to the indexNewsday (New York, NY) Tuesday, May 25, 1999 Short Cuts/Ziff-Davis Eyes Merger Or Sale Of Market Unit Compiled from Associated Press, Reuters, Bloomberg and Dow Jones reports Ziff-Davis Inc. said yesterday it has hired Morgan Stanley Dean Witter & Co. to help explore sale or merger options for its ZD Market Intelligence unit. Ziff-Davis said it is responding to recent third party expressions of interest in the unit, which provides sales and marketing programs for technology companies. New York-based Ziff-Davis is a media and marketing company focused on computer and Internet-related technology. It had revenues of $ 1.1 billion in 1998. BRITISH RETAILER BUYS PUBLISHER. British books-and-music retailer W.H. Smith Group PLC said yesterday it agreed to buy book publisher Hodder Headline PLC for 185 million pounds, or $ 296 million. The offer, at 5.25 pounds a share, is 43 percent higher than Hodder's stock price of 3.67 pounds at the close of business Friday. W.H. Smith said the purchase would expand its presence in education, reference and consumer publishing. It will also accelerate the company's brand development and provide additional capability and product content for developing online products. CADBURY DILUTES COKE DEAL. Britain's Cadbury Schweppes Plc said yesterday it had watered down its soft drink sale to Coca-Cola Co., cutting the price to $1.1 billion from $ 1.85 billion as a number of Western European markets were cut from the deal. Cadbury agreed last December to sell its soft drink brands outside the United States, France and South Africa to global giant Coke. However, the deal has hit regulatory hurdles in a number of countries, particularly Belgium and Germany. Cadbury said it had agreed to revise the plan to now exclude all European Union states except Britain, Ireland and Greece. Norway and Switzerland will also no longer be included. PRODIGY ALIGNS WITH BELL ATLANTIC. Online service provider Prodigy Communications Corp. said yesterday it would partner with Bell Atlantic Corp. to provide high-speed Internet access in the Northeastern Baby Bell's service region. Prodigy will use Bell Atlantic's digital subscriber line technology, which allows for always-connected Web access at speeds 125 times faster than current 56 kilobit modems. The agreement is the first step in Prodigy's plan to offer high-speed access nationwide. Bell Atlantic launched its DSL service last October, and plans to make it available in areas serving more than 8 million households by the end of 1999 and 16 million by the end of the year 2000. ABOVENET MAKES ACQUISITION. AboveNet Communications Inc., a supplier of managed Internet services, yesterday said it agreed to acquire a network exchange facility for managing traffic over the Internet from Compaq Computer Corp. for about $75 million. AboveNet will acquire the assets and liabilities of Compaq's Palo Alto Internet Exchange-the only commercial Internet Exchange facility not owned by a major phone company-for about $ 70 million in cash plus an agreement to provide certain ongoing services to Compaq. Internet exchanges act as key transfer points for high volumes of traffic on the hub-and-spoke network of networks that, linked together, constitute the Internet. SETTLEMENT IN DELOREAN CASE. A long-running lawsuit on behalf of DeLorean Motor Co.'s creditors has been settled, marking the end of the defunct automaker's financial battles. Accounting firm Arthur Andersen has agreed to pay $27.8 million as part of a settlement on behalf of DeLorean's creditors, DeLorean trustee David W. Allard Jr. said yesterday. He said the settlement, reached Friday, will take care of about 90 percent of the roughly 260 creditors' bills. Except for a few loose ends, he said this marks the end of the litigation on behalf of the creditors that began more than a decade ago. GLICKMAN: TONE DOWN BEEF RHETORIC. U.S. Agriculture Secretary Dan Glickman said yesterday both sides should tone down their rhetoric in a beef trade dispute that has the United States on the verge of imposing punitive duties on $202 million worth of European Union goods. In a speech to the World Agricultural Forum, Glickman said that the United States would not back away from its insistence that the EU open its market to beef from hormone-treated cattle. But a solution may be easier to reach if both Washington and Brussels "tone down" their recent tough talk on the issue, he said. INTEREST RATES FALL. Interest rates on short-term Treasury securities declined in yesterday's auction. The Treasury Department sold $ 7.5 billion in three-month bills at a discount rate of 4.495 percent, down from 4.57 percent last week. An additional $7.5 billion was sold in six-month bills at a rate of 4.57 percent, down from 4.63 percent. The three-month rate was the lowest since May 10, when the bills sold for 4.48 percent. The six-month rate was the lowest since May 10, when the rate was 4.51 percent. MIXED REPORT ON UPSTATE ECONOMY. Upstate New York's economy is rallying after a long listless stretch but the growth is relatively minor and hindered by population losses, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York says. "Upstate New York has shown signs of improvement recently, but its growth is still fairly small compared with that of the entire state and the nation," read an economic analysis released by the bank this month. The analysis noted a number of signs that suggest an upswing for upstate New York since 1997: growing employment, rising home sales, lower unemployment rates. In fact, upstate gained almost 38,000 jobs in 1998-the area's largest jump since 1990. But the average employment growth in upstate New York for 1997 and 1998 (1.21 percent) was still less than half the national rate (2.57 percent). PUBLISHER FACES LAWSUIT. Thomson Corp.'s West Publishing Co. is facing a class-action lawsuit alleging the legal publisher gave female employees far fewer shares in the company than it gave to male employees. The suit, originally filed Oct. 16, 1997, and seeking $500 million, was granted class-action status by a U.S. District Court in Tampa, Fla. The class will represent women employees of the legal publisher from Jan. 20 to June 20 of 1996 who could have received stock from the company, but either didn't get any or received fewer shares than their male counterparts. West Publishing, known as West Group, operates Westlaw, a popular online provider of legal information. CREDIT CARD FIRM IS SUED. Providian Financial Corp. which is being investigated by the San Francisco district attorney's office, has been hit with a lawsuit that charges unfair and deceptive business practices. The lawsuit, filed in San Francisco Superior Court Friday, was brought by a Providian card holder, according to the plaintiff's lawyer, Daniel Girard, who said he would seek class-action status for the suit. The suit alleges San Francisco-based Providian, the nation's ninth largest credit card issuer, posted payments late, imposed unauthorized and excessive charges and falsely promised to repair damaged credit, Girard said. Providian spokeswoman Laurie Cole declined to comment because she said the company had not yet seen the suit. Return to the indexThe Evening Post (Wellington) Tuesday, May 25, 1999 Shipley Threatens US Over Tariffs By Brent Edwards Prime Minister Jenny Shipley has threatened to take the United States to the World Trade Organization if it restricts lamb imports. US President Bill Clinton is due to decide early next month whether the US should impose tariffs on lamb imports - badly affecting New Zealand and Australian exporters - in a bid to save the American sheep industry. "I have made it clear New Zealand would reserve its position if it (the decision) was highly detrimental to New Zealand trade . . . the WTO is certainly an option," Mrs Shipley said today. Meat Board chairman John Acland returned from Washington urging the New Zealand Government to do more to convince the Americans to keep the US lamb trade open. He was due to meet Mrs Shipley late this afternoon. Mrs Shipley said she had written a letter to President Clinton late last week, making New Zealand's position on the issue clear. New Zealand would continue to lobby between now and Queen's Birthday Weekend when Mr. Clinton was expected to decide whether to impose tariffs or not. Yesterday she rejected any suggestion New Zealand was not taking the lamb issue seriously because of Mike Moore's bid to head the WTO. Trade Minister Lockwood Smith was also talking tough today, saying the United States would destroy its lamb industry if it imposed tariffs and "they will destroy their international credibility". He and Australian Trade Minister Tim Fischer intended taking the matter up with US Trade representative Charlene Barshefsky in Budapest later this week. "The US's reputation is at stake here," he said. The US's position as a champion of free trade may be jeopardized if it imposes tariffs, particularly as this week US Agriculture Secretary Dan Glickman told the World Agricultural Forum the US would be pushing for upcoming WTO talks to make reducing agricultural tariffs a priority. Federated Farmers president Malcolm Bailey said today the threat to take the US to the WTO had shaken up a few people in the US who had "assumed they could do whatever they wanted with impunity". The issue could cloud the Asia Pacific Economic Co-operation leaders' meeting in Auckland in September, with farmers suggesting they would protest against President Clinton if tariffs are imposed. Return to the indexREUTERS Via Yahoo BizNews Tuesday May 25, 5:17 pm Eastern Time Some Momentum For Ag Export Subsidy Cuts - US AideST. LOUIS, May 25 (Reuters) - The United States has picked up some key support for its goal of eliminating agricultural export subsidies in the next round of world trade talks slated to begin late this year, a U.S. negotiator said on Tuesday. ``It's an ambitious goal and we don't kid ourselves it will be easy,'' James Murphy, assistant U.S. trade representative for agriculture, said in a speech at the World Agricultural Forum, an international meeting to discuss all aspects of farming. The Cairns Group, which includes Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada and 11 other agricultural export nations, is already on record in support of eliminating agricultural export subsidies, Murphy said. In addition, the 34 countries of North and South America have adopted a similar goal for the proposed negotiations on a Free Trade Area of the Americas, he said. A recent key development is China's commitment to forego agricultural export subsidies as a condition of joining the World Trade Organization, Murphy said. The big factor remains the European Union, which accounted for more than 80 percent of world agricultural export subsidies in 1995 and 1996, the first two years of the Uruguay Round trade pact, according to the U.S. Agriculture Department. International trading rules already prohibit export subsidies for industrial goods, but reforms in the agricultural sector have been harder to achieve. In the run up for the WTO trade talks, the United States has begun consultations with Africa nations to enlist their support for the goals of eliminating export subsidies, reducing agricultural tariffs and increasing market access. Those objectives ``are every much in their interest as ours,'' Murphy said. The United States also is consulting with the Mercosur group of South American trading nations, which contains many members of the free-market oriented Cairns Group, he said. ``We have, of course, a few clouds on the horizon'' in preparing for the WTO talks, Murphy said. Those include the European Union's ``insufficient'' reforms of its Common Agricultural Policy and two outstanding trade disputes with the EU involving beef and bananas, he said. ``But we think (those disputes) are resolvable and we approach these negotiations with optimism and hope that three years hence we will have some good results for you,'' Murphy said. The United States has set a three-year goal for concluding the next round of world trade talks. That would be less than half the time it took to conclude the Uruguay Round. Return to the indexREUTERS Via Yahoo BizNews Tuesday May 25, 10:29 pm Eastern Time Farm Forum Offers Preview Of WTO TalksBy Doug Palmer ST. LOUIS, May 25 (Reuters) - Participants at the first meeting of the World Agricultural Forum offered an early glimpse of the divisions that are likely to emerge when world farm trade talks get underway later this year. In separate speeches to the gathering of more than 300 government and agriculture industry experts, officials from the United States and Argentina, two major farm exporters, called for an aggressive agenda to open up markets. But representatives from Japan and South Korea made clear their preference to maintain some protections to preserve what they called ``the multi-functionality of agriculture.'' Some functions, such as the conservation of farm land that might be lost to urban development, ``cannot be realized in market prices,'' said Hisao Azuma, a former Japanese vice minister for international agricultural affairs. Yong-Kyu Choi, director general of South Korea's international agricultural bureau, said the upcoming talks should recognize the desire of some nations to preserve their traditional rural culture and maintain scenic landscapes. Both South Korea and Japan only reluctantly opened their rice markets to a small volume imports in the last round of world trade talks, citing similar concerns about the preservation of traditional culture. Having made that step, South Korea now has concerns about food security if it becomes dependent on imports, Choi said. Argentine Agriculture Minister Ricardo Novo argued that government programs to preserve scenic landscape and rural lifestyles are only acceptable if they do not restrict trade. In Argentina's view, the upcoming talks are ``an opportunity to finalize the task of liberalizing agricultural trade'' that was begun in the Uruguay Round, Novo said. That means slashing agricultural import tariffs, reforming the administration of tariff-rate quotas that block imports and taking other steps to open markets, he said. Agricultural export subsidies should also be ``totally eliminated'' in the next round, Novo said. Such subsidies transfer the cost of generous domestic farm support programs in countries such as the EU to more efficient agricultural producers like Argentina, he said. In separate speeches on Monday and Tuesday, neither U.S. Agriculture Secretary Dan Glickman nor Assistant U.S. Trade Representative James Murphy mentioned ``multi-functionality.'' Aside from that, there was little difference between what the United States and Argentina outlined as goals for the next round of world agricultural trade talks. Leonard Guarria, chairman and president of the World Agricultural Forum, said the group plans to hold a world congress in St. Louis every two years. In between, the group will hold regional meetings in Asia, South America, Europe and Africa, he said. The inaugural congress was marred by the absence of any major EU agricultural minister, although EU Agricultural Commissioner Franz Fischler was invited. Return to the index
The St. Louis Post-Dispatch Wednesday May 26, 1999 Scientists Debate How To Get Biotech Accepted By Robert Steyer If crop biotechnology has such great potential, how can policymakers and scientists - especially those overseas - convince more people of its value and stop the increasing drumbeat of criticism? Roger N. Beachy, president of the Donald Danforth Plant Science Center here, said the public's acceptance of medical biotechnology illustrates why scientists, farmers and educators must be more vocal about agricultural biotechnology. But Christopher J. Leaver, who has seen the crop biotech debate spin out of control in his native England, said "education" is too mild a word for turning public and political opinion. M2 PRESSWIRE Wednesday, May 26, 1999 Young & Rubicam Brand Futures Group Conducts Global Audit On Food Trends Marian Salzman, Young & Rubicam's resident futurist, today released topline findings from the agency's most recent global audit of trends in food and eating. The study-conducted by Brand Futures Group, of which Salzman is worldwide director-was undertaken in April 1999 and was intended to monitor current attitudes, beliefs, and values as they relate to products associated with healthy eating/ lifestyles. Drawing on its unique network of trendscouts in 70 countries, BFG explored the big picture regarding future eats. Topline findings included the following: * In 1999, our attitudes toward food, and even the foods we eat, are becoming both globalized and increasingly localized. This "globalization" of food is leading us to an evolving master taste palette. * Expect the Easternization of North American eats and health routines (alternative medicines, various forms of mind/body discipline, etc.) to intensify. * Consumers' search for ever-more-convenient food and for value-added food will be balanced by a quest for the peace of mind associated with comfort foods. * Market specialization looks to be a key horizontal shift in North America. (Most significant: the increasing impact of health and dietary concerns among the aging. "The silver age will be a core target audience," noted one trendscout in Japan. "Do companies want to provide the food especially to the elderly people which will help them to live healthy lives?") At the recent World Congress of the World Agricultural Forum (St. Louis, 23-25 May), Marian Salzman noted that in today's world, "change is the only constant. And constant change manifests itself in countless inconsistencies." She implored agribusiness executives to recognize the powerful yins and yangs in their industry, including the twin pushes for "pure" foods and genetically altered foods, and our nostalgia for old- fashioned foods versus the enormous growth in the categories of "instant eats" and home meal replacement. In discussing the "globalization" of food, Salzman noted that whereas food trends are crossing borders at an unprecedented rate, we're also seeing a new focus on the origins of the foods themselves. In Japan, for instance, concern over dioxin contaminants has led to increased scrutiny of farm and factory sources. (Other conference presenters included Ganesh Kishore, president, nutrition sector, Monsanto Company; Lawrence Klein, Nobel Laureate, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania; and Abner Womack, co-director, Food and Agricultural Policy Research Institute.) Turning to Europe, Salzman noted that that region is seeing three distinct food paths: 1. The reduction of man-made risk, as "bio-foods" become more popular as a result of fears over genetic tampering. 2. Increased convenience resulting in a redefinition of "fast food": instant eats with the values of home cooking and even meals of pills, potions, and bars/gels for the "007 crowd," supplemented by genetic enhancement. 3. Genuine soul food-that is, foods that benefit the body beyond mere sustenance. Marian Salzman and Brand Futures Group CEO Ira Matathia are widely regarded as the leading trendsighters in Europe. BFG's trend book (published under a variety of titles) has achieved best-selling status in the Netherlands and the United Kingdom, and has enjoyed strong sales in Germany, Norway, and Portugal. The U.S. edition of the book, titled "Next: Trends for the Near-Future," is slated to be published on 9 September 1999 (yes, the long-anticipated 9-9-99!) by Overlook Press. Other observations about what's next for the European food scene included: * Rejection of chemicals and additives; increased interest in local products obtained via small-scale production * GMO food legitimized as the right answer to a healthful, good-tasting diet * Increased demand for products that promote health, youth, and well- being through active components stemming from scientific research * Rise in interest in exotic ethnic foods (a trend influenced by increased travel, multinational business, the 'Net, and the search for roots and authenticity) * Indiscriminate blending of multicultural ingredients and preparation techniques * Diversification of eating habits-moving from three squares a day to a more distributed model involving many small meals and between-meal munching (among the causes: longer workdays, extended single years) In covering what's next on the American menu, Salzman noted that fear is today's condiment: "We're significantly less bullish on bio-engineered foods, and organics are poised to become the third wave in health- positioned foods, for they address three consumer trends: demand for premium quality, desire to protect the environment, and concern about food safety." Despite consumers' misgivings about genetic tampering, Salzman contends that "even healthy eaters are willing to yield to technology if it brings with it improved taste at less cost to the waistline." She reminded the group that Frito-Lay's fat-free Wow potato chips were the best-selling new product in the U.S. in 1998, despite negative publicity about their key ingredient, Olean, and its potential side effects. World Agricultural Forum is an independent organization created to meet the urgent need for open debate and discussion about all of the industry sectors of agriculture, encompassing the production of food, fiber, and fuel for everyone worldwide. The initial World Congress, held 23-25 May in St. Louis, brought together experts from production, supply, technology, government, academia, transportation, environmental protection, and other disciplines. Agenda items included global economic and agricultural baseline long-range forecasting, world calorie and nutrition demands, implications for food stocks, trade, and consumer trends, and sustainability and environmental considerations, among other issues. Headquartered in New York, Brand Futures Group is an independent company within Young & Rubicam Inc., the worldwide marketing communications company that owns Young & Rubicam Advertising, the Wunderman Cato Johnson direct marketing consultancy, Burson- Marsteller, Cohn & Wolfe public relations, and the Landor branding consultancy. BFG creates products and services that spur employee and client thinking on issues, trends, and events affecting consumer markets worldwide. The company publishes actionable intelligence for global marketers and disseminates this information on- and offline, in a range of formats- from simple bytes to best-selling books. Brand Futures Group research on food and more than 100 other topics is available for sale at www.brandfutures.com. Return to the indexREUTERS Via Yahoo BizNews Wednesday, May 26 9:02 AM ET Biotech Concerns Dominate World Ag Forum MeetingBy Doug Palmer ST. LOUIS (Reuters) - Crop-boosting advances in biotechnology that scare many European consumers dominated two days of discussions at the first ever meeting of the World Agricultural Forum. Up to the last panel Tuesday, participants at the international meeting of more than 300 government and industry agricultural officials fretted over European resistance to the crops, which many say are essential to feed an estimated additional 1.8-2.0 billion people by 2020. ``There is a growing hostility against GM (genetically modified) foods in Europe and it will get a lot worse before it gets better,'' Liam Downey, director of TEAGASC, Ireland's farm education and extension service, told the forum. To address European concerns -- justified or not -- there is an ``absolute urgent need for the segregation of GM materials,'' Downey said. ``Until that gets done, we're not going anywhere'' on the issue, he said. To date, U.S. grain firms have been reluctant to segregate genetically modified crops from conventional varieties because of the huge expense involved in keeping them separated throughout the grain storage and distribution system. But Monday, Cargill President Ernie Micek acknowledged segregation systems were the way of the future because of the proliferation of biotech corn, soybean and other crop varieties that could appear over the next 10 to 15 years. As more crops emerge with special end-user traits, such as the ability to fight cancer, heart disease and infectious diseases, the grain industry will ``need to change the technology to bring these crops to market,'' Micek said. The first generation of genetically modified crops have been designed to boost yields by increasing a plant's resistance to a certain herbicide or giving it the ability to produce its own toxin to kill pests. While U.S. regulatory officials have given farmers the green light to plant genetically modified crops, many European consumers fear the crops could damage human health or the environment. The contrary views have led to delays in European Union approval of certain genetically modified varieties. That, in turn, has blocked U.S. corn sales to Europe, costing U.S. farmers about $200 million last year. Consumers in Japan and South Korea, have expressed similar concerns about the long-term effects of genetically modified crops. In Mexico, officials have balked at approving genetically modified corn, even though other genetically modified crops have been okayed. ``It's been looked on as almost a curse if we allow biotech corn to go into Mexico,'' said Francisco Gurria, Mexican undersecretary of agriculture. The reasons have to do with the important role corn plays in Mexican culture, he said. It is the main ingredient in tortillas, the Mexican food staple, and an important historical crop because of its association with the Mayans. Downey called for an international scientific audit to assess both the cost and benefits of genetically modified crops. European consumers ``are less and less convinced there's anything in it for them,'' even if the crops have the potential to boost food production and reduce pesticide use, he said. Monday, U.S. Agriculture Secretary Dan Glickman also saw a need for more public education on the biotech issue. ``We cannot force GMOs (genetically modified organisms) on reluctant consumers,'' Glickman said. ``Instead, we have to bring them along.'' Return to the indexJournal of Commerce Thursday, May 27, 1999 Scientific Review Sought For Genetically Altered Foods By Tim Todd A round table of agricultural industry leaders and government officials from around the world talked about the need for an international science-based review to assess the benefits and risks of genetically modified foods. They were here Tuesday for the final discussion of the World Agricultural Forum's 1999 World Congress. Although panels and presentations during the two-day event discussed topics ranging from shipping logistics and trade to the impact of cellular telephone technology on food production in developing nations, the forum came to a close with the issue of genetically modified crops, or GMOs, continuing to account for much of the discussion. Increasingly popular among U.S. farmers since their introduction only a few years ago, GMOs have become a cause for concern in some parts of the world, including the European Union, which refuses to accept some genetically modified food products. During presentations here, many remarked that GMOs would likely be among the topics receiving significant discussion when the next round of World Trade Organization talks opens this fall in Seattle. After restating warnings offered by other Europeans who made presentations here suggesting that the United States may be underestimating European resistance to GMOs, Liam Downey, director of TEAGASC, an Irish agricultural education program, suggested the need for a ""science-based technical audit, ''that would show both benefits and risks of GMOs. Mr. Downey offered that such an audit could interject ""some rationale into what is becoming an increasingly emotional debate.'' His comments were similar to those made previously by others at the Congress and those on the final discussion panel agreed with the idea. There was, however, some question about who would conduct such an investigation. Participants noted that the review could not be done by private industry, individual countries or even entire continents, given the current status of the debate. The effort, they said, must be global. "I agree there should be science-based findings; then we can educate people about this,'' said Ir. H. Soleh Solahudden, Indonesia's minister of agriculture. "We have to separate the political issues.'' Among those on the final panel, Francisco Gurria, undersecretary of agriculture for Mexico, said in his country, using genetically modified corn would currently be seen as "about a curse.'' "We have to educate the public and the consumer before we would ever (implement) this technology that has many advantages but that is foreign to many,'' he said. However, Enea Ican Truta, deputy secretary general for Romania's Ministry of Agriculture and Food, said that biotechnology offers the only alternative for feeding a bulging world population without increasing crop acreage. "Biotechnology is the technology for the next century, which happens to begin in about 100 days,'' Mr. Truta told the panel. The final discussion included the restating of many points made earlier in the Congress, with panelists noting the need for additional educational efforts across the food sector. Throughout the event, some presenters also offered their visions for a future in which they said genetically modified foods could act as plant factories, providing health benefits to end-use consumers or even functioning in a pharmaceutical capacity. One presenter noted that edible plants can act as vaccines and noted that there are preclinical studies scheduled on potatoes genetically modified to include a hepatitis B vaccine. Others cited the need to feed a growing world population. But getting to those kinds of genetic products, panelists said, is going to require a wider global acceptance of the new technology. The Congress's final discussion panel ended on a statement by Mr. Downey, who suggested that ""the market will sort out biotechnology in one of two ways.'' The first solution would be implementation of the new technology, he said, and the other alternative would be its rejection by consumers. Return to the indexThe National Journal Group, Inc. Greenwire Friday, May 28, 1999 Genetic Engineering: Industry Seeks Science Review Discussions about the need "for an international science-based review to assess the benefits and risks of genetically modified foods" dominated an international conference of farm industry leaders. At the World Agricultural Forum's 1999 World Congress in St. Louis this week, Liam Downey, director of an Irish agricultural education program called TEAGASC, suggested that an international scientific review could inject "some rationale into what is becoming an increasingly emotional debate." Other experts agreed with the idea, but there was no consensus about who would conduct such an investigation. The review could not be done by governments or private industry, participants said, concluding that it would have to be some sort of global project (Tim Todd, Bridge News/Journal of Commerce, May 27). TIME magazine this week recapped the controversy over a laboratory study that indicated pollen from GM corn could kill monarch butterflies that ingest it (Greenwire, May 20) (May 31 issue). EUROPE, TO THE BRINK AGAIN, IN A FOOD FIGHT The European Union's top environmental official yesterday "slammed" a German proposal that she said would "water down" plans to tighten regulation of genetically modified organisms. German Environment Minister Juergen Trittin hopes the new proposal, unveiled on May 26, will serve as the basis of an agreement when EU environment ministers meet in Luxembourg on June 24 and 25. But a spokesman for Acting Environment Commissioner Ritt Bjerregaard called the German proposal "extremely worrying" and said she will fight it. Bjerregaard said the German plan would give products a 12-year license, as opposed to the 7-year license she proposes, and would allow approvals to be renewed automatically without public notice (Reuters/PlanetArk, May 28). Meanwhile, French Farm Minister Jean Glavany said he would not rule out a moratorium on genetically modified corn if it threatens the environment, and he appointed an expert panel for advice on the matter (Reuters/PlanetArk, May 28). Back in the UK, the Green Party said voters should make next month's elections to the European Parliament a referendum on the government's handling of the GM food issue Michael McCarthy, London Independent, May 26). Return to the indexREUTERS Via NewsEdge Friday May 28, 2:51 pm Eastern Time Farm Leader Urges Fed: Dont Raise RatesBy Doug Palmer WASHINGTON, May 28 (Reuters) - The leader of the largest U.S. farm organization urged the Federal Reserve on Friday not to raise interest rates at its next policy-making meeting in late June. "My own view is that tightening now, raising interest rates, tightening credit, restricting money further, is exactly the wrong thing to do," Dean Kleckner, president of the American Farm Bureau Federation, told Reuters. If the Fed hikes interest rates, that will "put even more pressure on worldwide commodity prices at a time when they can't stand much more," Kleckner said. Earlier this week, Kleckner told a meeting of the World Agricultural Forum in St. Louis that he believed only Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan could reverse a severe slump in worldwide commodity prices. He urged Greenspan to look at a market basket of gold and other commodity prices when determining interest-rate policy. Gold prices are now at 20-year lows at about $269.50 per ounce. Despite growing sentiment that the Fed will have to raise interest rates to keep inflation from becoming a problem, Kleckner said on Friday he was concerned that U.S. monetary policy is already too tight. "I don't see inflation out there now. What I do see is a tendency toward deflation," Kleckner said. Deflation is a drop in the general level of prices, usually resulting from an economic downturn triggered by tight money policies of the Federal Reserve system. Changes in fiscal policy, such as tax increases, also can cause deflation. The Dow Jones industrial average has fallen 3.6 percent since the Federal Reserve last week announced that it may raise interest rates because of signs that inflation could create some problems for the economy. On Thursday, the Dow fell 235.23 points, or 2.20 percent, to 10,466.93 -- the largest drop in point terms so far this year. Since many countries key their currency values off the U.S. dollar, the Fed needs to recognize the worldwide impact its policies have on consumer spending, he said. The two-year slump in commodity prices suggest "a lack of liquidity in the world, a lack of money, a lack of buying power," Kleckner said. Although crude oil has risen more than $5 per barrel from its recent lows in late February, world "commodity prices are all too cheap," Kleckner said. "They need to be higher." To have a stabilizing effect on other commodity prices, Kleckner said he would like to see gold prices at $310 to $320 per ounce, instead of about $269.50 to $270 currently. Return to the indexDoanes Agricultural Report (St. Louis, MO) May 28, 1999 Cargill Chairman Ernest Micek forecasts a segregated grain industry. In a talk at the World Agricultural Forum, Micek said GMOs would require grain users to demand strict segregation of crops from seeding through final processing. He also warned that sweeping changes must be made in agricultural production, storage, shipment, and marketing. Return to the indexDoanes Agricultural Report (St. Louis, MO) May 28, 1999 WORLD AGRICULTURAL FORUM About 300 world leaders in business, academia, and governments gathered in St. Louis, MO this week for what was billed as the first ever World Agricultural Forum The objective of the World Agricultural Forum (WAF) was to discuss world food problems and challenges. Speakers included politicians from around the world, scientists, economists, business executives, and leaders of interest groups. This diverse group of political industry leaders provided a wide variety of views on current and future agricultural problems and what can be done about them. Many of the speakers mentioned the huge challenge that will face world agriculture over the next few decades as world population rises from 6 billion to 8 billion by 2025. Much of the discussion focused on how world food production can increase enough to feed the additional people, without harming the environment, and allow for further improvements in diets of those living in the more rapidly developing countries. TRADE ISSUES Agriculture Secretary Glickman outlined the U.S. agenda in the World Trade Organization negotiations that will begin this fall. The U.S. wants to eliminate export subsidies, restrict state trading enterprises, like the Canadian Wheat Board, reduce tariffs on agricultural products, increase the ceiling on Tariff Rate Quotas, and insist that sanitary and psytosanitary restrictions be based on science. The agenda is aggressive, and the secretary admits this round of negotiations will probably be more difficult than the marathon talks under the Uruguay round of GATT. Dean Kleckner, head of the American Farm Bureau Federation, noted that the average tariff faced by U.S. agricultural products is 50%. Clearly, these barriers to trade need to be reduced so that people in poor countries will have access to the food they need. "New technology is the worlds only unlimited resource," Kleckner said, but many countries reject technological progress in agriculture. Dr. Lawrence Klein, a Nobel prize winner in economics, said the East Asian financial crisis is over but warned that the economic upturn will be modest. One reason for the modest recovery is that the U.S. is the only engine of growth in the world. Economies in both Japan and Europe are performing poorly and will probably continue to do so. BIOTECHNOLOGY One theme of the conference was the need for more food production in the future. This led to calls for widespread adoption and acceptance of biotechnology. Sen. Kit Bond (R-Mo.) called plant biotechnology the third greatest revolution, following the industrial revolution and the information-technology revolution. Ganesh Kishore, president of Monsantos Nutrition and Consumer Sector, said that biotechnology offers the promise of higher yields, fewer inputs, reduced production costs, and less damage to the environment. Many WAF speakers extolled the value of biotechnology in meeting future food needs. However, Guy Walker, the former head of Unilever in the United Kingdom, noted that the level of hostility to GMO products in Europe is "so intense that GMO products may never be accepted." At least with the products developed so far, consumers in Europe see no benefits, but plenty of risks. Europeans want the choice to buy, or not buy, products made from GMO products. Walker suggested that there might be "no GMO products on grocery store shelves in the UK in six months." Most speakers felt that food production can be increased without hurting the environment. In contrast, Dr. Peter Raven, director of Missouri Botonical Gardens, and professor of botany at Washington University, stated that the "world cannot afford another century like this one." He noted that we are losing diversity and that at the current pace, two-thirds of all living organisms will be extinct in 1,000 years. Clearly, world agriculture faces some difficult challenges in the future. About 850 million people in the world are chronically undernourished. These people live in poverty and cannot afford an adequate diet. About 2 billion people will be added to the world population during the next 25 years, and the majority of these people will be in the very poor countries. Boosting world food production does not address the problem of poverty, a topic which was generally ignored at the WAF. Editors Note: Though the World Agricultural Forum was a historic event, not much was really accomplished. Many controversial issues are far from being resolved. World leaders talked about the need for an international science-based review to assess the benefits and risks of genetically modified foods, but leaders from the European Union were not in attendance. Return to the indexDoanes Agricultural Report (St. Louis, MO) May 28, 1999 WORLD AGRICULTURAL FORUM Leaders from more than 300 agricultural businesses, academia, and governments convened in St. Louis, MO to discuss world food problems and challenges. This historical meeting was billed the 1999 World Congress, Call to Action and was created to meet the urgent need for open debate and discussion on critical agricultural issues. Trade and biotechnology issues were the main topics of discussion during the two-day summit. See this weeks Focus Report for more coverage and insight. Return to the indexTHE PANTAGRAPH (Bloomington, IL) Sunday, May 30, 1999 NO SALE: Biotech Crop Boosters Learn No One's Buying By Alan Guebert It's an ag economic fact that feed efficiency in hogs peaks when the animal reaches a weight of 220 or so pounds. Yet the national average slaughter weight of all hogs sold hovers near 260 pounds. Why do farmers grow the hogs to heavier weights despite the obvious feed inefficiency and extra cost? Because that's the way packers want to buy hogs; it adds to their kill efficiency. And since a hog has little value to the farmer until a customer in this case, a packer - buys it, the farmer subsidizes the feed inefficiency to please the customer and enhance the customer's efficiency. In short, the customer is always right - even when he's wrong. After all, the sale is the key. Without it, the seller is not in business. At least that's one of the essential tenets of a functioning market economy. Lately, though, U.S. farmers-sellers have become convinced they are more important than the customer. Witness the growing fiasco in U.S.-grown biotech crops: Come hell or high water, say American ag leaders and politicians, U.S. farmers will sell biotech food to customers who have made it unmistakably plain they don't want it. The height of this arrogant, market-defying foolishness may have been reached May 17, when Sen. John Ashcroft, R-Mo., sent a letter to President Bill Clinton demanding he put biotech crops on the agenda of the mid-June G-8 meeting in Cologne, Germany. The president, whose U.S. Department of Commerce looks to be a wholly owned subsidiary of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, should push the biotech babies of Momma Monsanto and Daddy DuPont onto foreign food customers, because, wrote Ashcroft, "We should not have to choose between biotechnology and exporting. American agriculture needs both." Not so, Senator. And who's this "we?" "We" do not need both if the so-called success of one, biotech, leads to the collapse of the other, exports, and a farmer-cracking global trade war. Besides, what do "we" have to do with it? Like the hog farmer who must sell 260-pound hogs to packers rather than more efficiently produced 220-pounders, "we" do not make the choices here. "They" - our customers - do. What part of this simple market dynamic is so confusing to farm leaders? Ironically, it is not the least bit confusing to other players in the global market. Giant ag processors Archer Daniels Midland and A.E. Staley recently warned farmers they would not purchase U.S.-grown biotech corn varieties not yet approved by the European Union. And, as if to drive home the point to rock-headed biotech boosters, in early May ADM announced it would pay 15-cent per bushel premiums to farmers for non-GMO soybeans. Cargill, however, took a different approach. It announced it would buy the GMO corn not wanted by the EU, keep it segregated, and then resell it in the United States. Ernst Micek, the outgoing Cargill boss, explained what that means in a speech to fellow masters of the universe at the World Agricultural Forum in St. Louis May 24. "Sweeping changes must be made in agricultural production, storage, shipment and market," said Micek, according to Reuters. "Pricing practices will also undergo change as a reflection of the varying qualities and properties of the commodities," he added. Hey, suckers, Micek seems to be saying to U.S. farmers, if you grow it despite the lack of universal customers we'll take it off your hands through, ahem, new "pricing practices." Given the market risks Cargill accepts when buying the biotech crops, bet the farm that "new" means "lower." Like the global grain cartel, other food market participants are trying to estimate their risks in biotech food. One, the business insurance industry, is examining GMO liability and doesn't like what it sees. In the May 6 issue of "Post," an insurance industry magazine, an underwriting manager for Cigna International suggests business insurers go slow on GMO coverage. "Our experience with asbestos, PCBs and other 'miracle' products in the past should have warned us of the potential dangers of diving into issues before we have an adequate awareness of the exposures," writes Maurice Pullen. "Prudence is, after all," he notes, "meant to be the underscoring principle of insurance underwriting." It should be the underscoring principle for American farmers, too, because even if the customer is wrong, he's always right. Alan Guebert is a syndicated columnist who writes weekly for The Pantagraph. He lives in Delavan. His e-mail address is [email protected]. Return to the indexHigh Plains Journal (Dodge City, KS) May 31, 1999 Global Financial Status No Longer Seen as Crisis The global financial crisis "is over as a crisis," but commodity price increases are expected to be "very moderate" over the short term, Nobel Laureate Lawrence Klein said May 24 during the first session of the World Agricultural Forums 1999 World Congress here. Klein, a professor emeritus from the University of Pennsylvania, who founded Wharton Econometric Forecasting Associates, focused his remarks on how the global economy affects agriculture. Klein noted signs of economic growth in some areas, but mentioned causes for concern around the world. He cautioned that while the global economy currently may not be at a crisis level, it does not mean there cannot be a relapse. He said there are signs of improvement in some parts of the world; however, unemployment could remain around 10% for some industrialized countries. Klein also noted some concerns for the current U.S. economy, including the trade deficit, relatively low levels of consumer savings and a stock market that may be "on the bubble." Speaking to a group that included ag industry leaders, economists and numerous industry experts from around the globe, Klein said economists expect slight growth in the short term for some developing countries. Oil prices, which Klein said could climb to $20 per barrel within the next two to three years, will help the economies of "a great number" of oil-producing countries, but will "not be strong enough to hurt the U.S. severely." However, oil may outpace other commodities. "We, on the whole, expect to see very modest increases in commodity prices," Klein said. For agriculture, Klein said he expects slight increases for a few agricultural commodities. Kleins remarks came amid presentations by a slate of speakers offering an overview of global agriculture to open the forum. After brief opening ceremonies May 23, the World Agricultural Forums 1999 World Congress started with remarks by Chairman John Danforth, Sen. Christopher Bond and Rep. Richard Gephardt, who made his comments from Washington, DC. Danforth, a former U.S. senator from Missouri, reiterated comments from the opening ceremonies, saying the event is designed to open dialogue and is a starting point for addressing some of the worlds agricultural concerns. "We only can begin this conversation here, but begin it we must," Danforth said. Return to the indexDaily Times Herald (Carroll, IA) May 31, 1999 Genetic Modification in Food Production Stirs Clash By Peter Graham Farming and your Freedom While refugees stream out of Kosovo and NATO continues to bomb Yugoslavia, farmers in the United States continue to suffer from a massive European headache of their own: the export crisis, a real "bomb." The European Union, ever mindful of its own farmers well-being, has stepped up its hate mongering over growth hormones and genetically modified seed. While farmers in Iowa reel from lost exports to Asian nations hard-hit by financial woes, further resistance by the EU to American exports of crops and meats is Excedrin headache No. 2 (prices are No. 1) during this soggy spring planting season. Ag Secretary Dan Glickman told the World Agricultural Congress in St. Louis, recently, that the farmers fight with the EU over beef-hormone additives may look "like the minor leagues" when compared with the fight over biotechnology and genetically modified organisms. Glickman said American ag interests should try to tone down their rhetoric about the lifting of the EU ban on our exports containing the efforts of bio-tech, hoping to foster greater understanding that will allow us to ultimately win the battle. He added that our ag sectors confidence in biotechnology is irrelevant if the consumers dont buy it. Judging from last weeks strident call for cutting use of Bt corn seed because of evidence that Monarch butterflies may be killed by it, the EU has allies on this side of the pond, all of which makes the bio-tech road that much more lumpy and unstable. "In Europe," Liam Downey, director of TEAGASC, Irelands farm education and extension service, told the World Ag Congress, "there is a growing hostility against genetically modified foods, and it will get a lot worse before it gets better." No wonder Glickman is worried. With American farmers up against the wall of poor prices, high expenses and iffy exports to Asia, further curtailments by EU will make for a longer-term ag crisis here. Downey believes it is imperative that U.S. firms completely segregate genetically modified materials from other exports. If they dont, Downey said, "were not going anywhere." U.S. grain firms have been reluctant to segregate genetically modified crops from conventional ones because of the huge expense in doing so, but some grain execs say such segregation will become the norm over the next 10 to 15 years. Thats a long time for Iowa farmers to wait for a stronger, more stable export picture, but a nice length of time for EU farmers to get a leg up on their North American competitors. It may be too soon to tell, but this drama has all the makings of an all-out trade war. Exacerbating the situation is the growing resistance at home to genetically modified food. The report that Monarch-butterfly populations may be irreparably harmed by Bt corn pollen is just one concern raised by environmentalists regarding high-tech agriculture. It seems that farmers need to educate their fellow citizens even as they try to educate European trade partners. Many Americans, though more accepting of bio-tech in their foodstuffs, are edgy about reports in Europe and at home of doubts about the safety of hormones and genetically modified food. Its going to be a tough job to keep the lid on while bio-tech comes of age. Secretary Glickman said it is not enough to say that critics are wrong, the industry must prove they are wrong. Meanwhile, Iowa farmers are dodging twisters and raindrops to plant lots of corn, presumably much of it Bt, and other row crops, in the hope that somehow the price will rise and stabilize and exports will pick up again. A daunting task. Many of the nations most outspoken ag organizations, among them the American Farm Bureau Federation, are concerned this spring that adequate economic and natural-disaster assistance is available to all commodities, something Congress is going to have to choke on. The 1998 $6 billion relief package is only the beginning of the long-term need for safety-net action. And, this is a presidential-election season, so look for the rhetoric to really heat up in the coming months as Election 2000 approaches. Freedom-to-Farm and the high-rollin days of export mania now seem eons ago. Itll be an interesting year to farm, God willin and the creek dont rise. Return to the indexIllinois Agri-News (La Salle, IL) June 4, 1999 Forum Offers Preview of WTO Issues Participants at the first meeting of the World Agricultural Forum here offered an early glimpse of the divisions that are likely to merge when World Trade Organization farm trade talks get under way later this year. In separate speeches to the gathering of more than 300 government and agriculture industry experts, officials from the United States and Argentina, two major farm exporters, called for an aggressive agenda to open up markets. But representatives from Japan and South Korea made clear their preference to maintain some protections to preserve what they called "the multi-functionality of agriculture." Some functions, such as the conservation of farm land that might be lost to urban development, "cannot be realized in market prices," said Hisao Azuma, a former Japanese vice minister for international agricultural affairs. Yong-Kyu Choi, director general of South Koreas international agricultural bureau, said the upcoming talks should recognize the desire of some nations to preserve their traditional rural culture and maintain scenic landscapes. Both South Korea and Japan only reluctantly opened their rice markets to a small volume of imports in the last round of world trade talks, citing similar concerns about the preservation of traditional culture. Having made that step, South Korea now has concerns about food security if it becomes dependent on imports, Choi said. Argentine Agriculture Minister Ricardo Novo argued that government programs to preserve scenic landscape and rural lifestyles are only acceptable if they do not restrict trade. In Argentinas view, the upcoming talks are "an opportunity to finalize the task of liberalizing agricultural trade" that was begun in the Uruguay Round, Novo said. That means slashing agricultural import tariffs, reforming the administration of tariff-rate quotas that block imports and taking other steps to open markets, he said. Agricultural export subsidies should also be "totally eliminated" in the next round, Novo said. Such subsidies transfer the cost of generous domestic farm support programs in countries such as the EU to more efficient agricultural producers like Argentina, he said. In separate speeches, neither U.S. Agriculture Secretary Dan Glickman nor Assistant U.S. Trade Representative James Murphy mentioned "multi-functionality." Aside from that, there was little difference between what the United States and Argentina outlined as goals for the next round of world agricultural trade talks. Leonard Guarria, chairman and president of the World Agricultural Forum, said the group plans to hold a world congress in St. Louis every two years. In between, the group will hold regional meetings in Asia, South America, Europe and Africa, he said. Return to the indexIndiana Agri-News (Indianapolis, IN) June 4, 1999 Cargill: GMOs Will Require Segregation Because of genetically modified organisms, grain users are going to start demanding strict segregation of crops from seeding through the final processed product, said Cargill chairman Ernest Micek. Speaking last weeks World Agricultural Forum in St. Louis, he warned that sweeping changes must be made in agricultural production, storage, shipment and marketing, according to a Reuters news report. "We will need to vastly expand our system," he said. Pricing practices will also undergo change as a reflection of the varying qualities and properties of the commodities, Micek said. The grain industry already segregates some varieties of corn and soybeans for special uses, but segregating the array of specialized crops of the future "will create a huge management and logistical challenge," he said. In a separate speech, Sen. Christopher Bond, D-Mo., called for international protocols to further the development and acceptance of biotechnology and genetically modified food, Reuters reports. "There is too much at stake not to come together," Bond told a group of about 300 delegates at the World Agricultural Forum. According to Reuters, farm delegates from about 16 countries are attending the conference. Bond was one of many speakers for greater international acceptance of genetically modified agricultural products, Reuters reported. Bond cautioned against letting "hysteria and unfounded fears" of biotechnology dominate the debate, and said that comprehensive international guidelines are critical if the U.S. and other leading agricultural countries are to reap the many health and economic benefits associated with new food modification technologies. About 150 countries tried in February to set international standards on movement of genetically-modified products from country to country. But after 10 days, the conference broke up without an agreement. Another attempt may be made in about a year. Februarys effort was hobbled by demands by major grain exporters for free trade and the health-and-safety concerns of importing countries. Some of the importers even went so far as to demand liability protection from suppliers if bio-engineered crops later prove harmful. The February conference, in Colombia, was also bogged down by the need for one set of standards for free flow of genetic seedstock across borders, and another set of rules for bulk grain trade. Return to the indexHigh Plains Journal (Dodge City, KS) June 7, 1999 Industry Looks for Answers to Europes GMO Issue By Tim Todd Bridge News Although speakers addressed everything from information technology to transportation, genetically modified organisms were the focus of numerous speakers addressing the first day of the World Agricultural Forums 1999 World Congress here May 24. As some lauded the potential of new technology, the retired chairman of Van Den Bergh Foods, Ltd. cautioned that the situation stemming from European resistance to such products may get worse before it improves. Guy Walker, who now acts as a consultant to the food industry after working for Unilever for nearly 40 years including a stint as national manager for Unilever in the United Kingdom, said the European Unions opposition to some genetically modified foods might not be resolved for as long as a few years. "The emotional attraction to traditional foods remains very strong (in Europe)," Walker said. The situation is "almost certain to get worse before its going to get better," he said. Walker, the former president of the United Kingdoms trade association for food manufacturers, said while environmental groups such as Greenpeace have had an impact in the matter and sensationalist media reports have been "a major problem," perhaps the most devastating factor leading to European resistance has been the lack of segregation and the inability of consumers to choose between genetically modified foods and organic products. Walker said to turn the current tide of opinion, food companies should introduce new genetically modified products alongside similar products that are free of genetic modification. Additionally, he said, the effects of such products must be continually monitored, but by scientists outside the industry. Those in the industry, he said, are not seen as credible by GMO critics. And finally, among other points, he reiterated the need for segregation to keep GMOs and non-GMOs separate. He noted that Cargill already has the capacity to do some identity preservation, which it does in the case of white corn. "We will need to vastly expand that ability," he said, adding that it will be "a huge management and logistical challenge." Regarding a solution to the current situation, Micek said, among other things, the World Trade Organization, or other similar global organizations, must work to craft a set of global standards for new food products. "We need a global science-based standard for food safety," he said. The safety concerns, he said, must be addressed "head on" by the industry. The technological advancements in food production have outpaced the publics understanding of the issue, Micek said. Secretary of Agriculture Dan Glickman similarly suggested that industry undertake an effort to provide consumers information about the evolving technology during his remarks here. The government, he said, hopes to have an advisory panel representing numerous facets of the industry in place by this summer. Executives with agricultural and pharmaceutical giant Monsanto and the farmer organization American Farm Bureau praised the potential of the new genetic technology in their remarks to an estimated 300 Forum attendees. Dean Kleckner, president of the American Farm Bureau, called new technology "the worlds only unlimited resource." Hendrik Verfaillie, president of St. Louis-based Monsanto, talked about a future where plants function as factories, adding that "plants are renewable resources." Like others here, Verfaillie discussed the potential in years to come for plants that meet specific consumer needs. "The line between food, health products and pharmaceuticals is going to become more and more blurred," he said. He also said the new technology offers the worlds farmers the best opportunity to feed a growing world without increasing planting acreage. Verfaillie called the growth in the planting of genetically modified seeds since their introduction only a few years ago "truly phenomenal." The first of the GMOs have focused primarily on pest resistance or the ability to withstand a particular chemical application. Verfaillie said Roundup Ready soybeans, which are able to tolerate post-emergence application of Monsantos Roundup herbicide, have allowed some farmers to conduct only a quarter of the chemical applications they once did. The product, he said, provides farmers with better weed control, higher yields and lower cost. Similar products are helping cotton producers, he said. But while farmers have been attracted to the technology, Verfaille acknowledged he need to resolve global concerns over such technology. "I hope that the Ag Forum is going to be a small step&or maybe a big step toward that solution, he said. Return to the indexFT Asia Intelligence Wire Wednesday, June 9, 1999 Farmer No More A 'Sack Of Potatoes' By Sharad Joshi On May 23, in the historic city of St. Louis, the former US senator, Mr. John C. Danforth, inaugurated the first conference of the World Agricultural Forum (WAF). St. Louis earned its place in history by providing the gateway to the westward movement of colonists. Today, it is the agricultural center of the US. More than 50 per cent of America's agricultural produce is grown within a radius of 500 miles from St. Louis, made fertile by the Mississippi, Missouri and Ohio rivers. St. Louis can legitimately be called the capital of world agriculture in all its aspects, including trade and technology. The conference had many 'firsts' to its credit and will go down in history, irrespective of the business it transacted. Farmers have rarely organized themselves at the international level. Most farmers' movements arise on local issues and die down in a short while, particularly if they gain some measure of success. Early farm unions militated against village tyrants, such as landlords and money-lenders. As farmers realized that the basic cause of their misery was more deep-rooted, regional farm unions came up, and some of them developed into national organizations. Farmers are highly individualistic citizens and do not interact much, even with fellow farmers. That is the reason why Marx called the peasantry a 'sackful of potatoes' forced into propinquity but incapable of interaction. Now, the potatoes have changed their genetic character and have started interacting at the global level. The second distinguishing feature of the WAF conference at St. Louis was the level of participation. From the US itself, half-a-dozen senators and the Secretary of State for Agriculture, Mr. Dan Glickman, were present. Dr. Lawrence R. Klein and Dr. Norman Borlaug, both Nobel laureates, guided the business of the conference. The meeting was held barely a year ahead of the scheduled opening of the second-round of WTO negotiations. It also coincided with the appearance of biotechnology with its tremendous promise. Luddites have opposed all innovations at each successive stage in history. There have always been forecasters of doom and resource crunches - from Malthus to the Rome Club. History holds two clear lessons: The progress of mankind has come through advancement of technology; and, if a new technology creates problems, they are resolved by further advancement of technology rather than by the type of 'return to nature' of Mahatma Gandhi, Tolstoy and Rousseau. That the ever-expanding world population eats better, lives better and longer the world over, except in countries which restrict individual freedom, was the conclusion drawn by Dr. Julian Simon after a voluminous study. The Luddites refuse to learn even the most obvious lessons on the threshold of biotechnology in agriculture. They are ganging up to create a fear psychosis and, due to the support and assistance of powerful vested interests endangered by the biotechnological breakthrough, are creating a widespread impression that farmers at large are opposed to biotechnology. Freedom of access to markets and to technology understandably became the focal points of the business agenda of the WAF conference. The presence of ministers of Agriculture from Indonesia, Japan, Argentina, Ireland, Korea, Romania, Mexico, Canada, Brazil, Silvia, Portugal, Ghana, European Union was of great help. On this point, the St. Louis conference marked another historic turn. Here was a gathering of farmers who had gathered in the old 'Westward Ho!' spirit of the pioneers, excited at the prospect of new frontiers in production, trade and technology. The conference was addressed by people directly involved in genetic engineering research and in the best position to calm the fears of latter-day Luddites. Several economists, including Dr. Borlaug, made studied presentations on how the acceptance of biotechnology is not a matter of choice but of necessity. Even conceding that biotechnology may have some undesirable fallout, closing the doors to the new field of technology would certainly be catastrophic. Freedom of access to markets and technology was emphasized by the conference. It did not stop there. Local farm organizations do not expand and, therefore, die out. A farm organization which starts at global level would similarly die out if it did not generate regional and national networks. The WAF plans to spread out in the continents and nations that are agriculturally significant. It has prepared schedules for holding similar conferences the world over in the next two years. The WAF is bound to cause two major developments. In the course of second round of WTO negotiations, the position of freedom- seeking farmers cannot be ignored. Those seeking protectionist barriers and opposing innovation can no more claim to be spokesmen of farmers at large. Second, the intellectual blackmail of modern-day environmentalists stands exposed. The vested interests in farm organizations, opposing free trade, modern technology, intellectual property rights and multinationals, cannot claim to represent all farmers. At the turn of the millennium, the farmers whom Marx ridiculed as a 'sackful of potatoes' are growing into a well- integrated community in the spirit of old-world pioneers. History is repeating itself, and St. Louis is becoming, for the second time, a gateway to new frontiers. (The author is founder-president Shetkari Sanghatana.) Return to the index (Front-page photo in Midamerica Farm Grower: story follows) Midamerica Farmer Grower (Perryville, MO) June 11, 1999 Glickman Announces Exemption of Food, Medicine From Trade Sanctions By Betty Valle Gegg MidAm Farmer Grower St. Louis, MO - While Congress will be looking at various options in the short term to strengthen and preserve family farm agriculture, the "big picture" continues to loom in the distance. Agriculture Secretary Dan Glickman told attendees at the World Agriculture Forum recently. "And big picture challenges in agriculture are considerable," he said. "Some of us could live long enough to see this world grow to be 12 billion people strong. And, of course, the growth is not happening in the mature economies but the developing world. "How are we going to feed the world in the 21st Century, despite a dwindling natural resource base?" he asked. Glickman said Congress is reevaluating long-held positions on trade sanctions. A few weeks ago it was announced that agricultural goods and medical equipment will be exempted from future unilateral trade sanctions. "Our new policy will also allow U.S. exports of food and medicine to the embargoed states of Iran, Lybia and Sudan, pending individual case-by-case reviews," Glickman announced. "This new policy is guided by the belief that sanctions should punish governments, but not people. Depriving the Iranian people of the opportunity to buy and eat American wheat does not advance our foreign policy goals. It just contributes to the deprivation of innocent people abroad and it shuts off potentially lucrative markets for America farmers." Glickman noted that food is different from other commodities as it is a human essential. "We should be moving it around the world with as few restrictions as possible." He said he fought to remove trade restrictions and embargoes for agricultural commodities when he was in Congress. This administration considers it a high priority that the U.S. is looked upon as a reliable supplier. That same principle is guiding the food aid program. "While people around the world are starving, here we sit with an agricultural abundance, much more food that we can possibly consume ourselves, when in fact our farmers can sell to overseas customers in traditional means," Glickman said. "So our government steps in as the purchasing agent and helps arrange for the transportation and distribution of food to needy people around the globe." It was recently announced that the U.S. will be providing 14 thousand tons of food per month to the Kosovo refuges. That food will feed 775,000 people for a month. Four shipments are set to go out within the next few weeks. "On top of that, we have plans to offer 160,000 additional tons of food and animal feed to countries in the region who are experiencing economic hardship because of the ongoing conflict," Glickman stated. "We are prepared to increase our donations, if necessary." He said the government is prepared to stockpile another months supply of food in the region in case it is needed. U.S. food donations to Kosovo through this year may reach 250,000 tons with a total value of about $100 million. This is but one of the U.S. food aid efforts. Also recently announced was the shipment of 400,000 tons of food to farming victims in North Korea. "Earlier this year, we reached an unprecedented food aid arrangement with Russia that includes donations and long-term credit sales adding up to 3.2 million tons of grains, medicines, oilseeds and other commodities. All told, in 1999 the U.S. |
