Who arranges the food supply? Proposed changes in reopening seed reuse

It is a small change that runs the risk of cultivating a major debate.

On the one hand, the principle of the privilege of Farmer – the traditional law of Canadian farmers to save seeds at the end of a growing season and to use them again the following year.

On the other hand, the principle of the rights of plant breeders – is the right of those who develop new seeds and plants to protect and take advantage of their discoveries.

The problem has been dormant for ten years. Now proposed changes in the government rules with regard to the rights of plant -dikers in that debate have been revived.

It also raises questions about how Canada gets his food and who arranges what is grown.

“Ultimately, it is about food security,” said Keith Currie, president of the Canadian Federation of Agriculture. The group supports the changes, including reducing the scope of the privilege of the farmer. “We are not only competing to keep food costs low, but also to ensure that we maintain new varieties that come to the fore for food availability.”

In a message Dated 9 August, the government announced proposed changes in the rights for the rights of plant breeders – a form of intellectual property protection for plants, similar to a patent. The regulations give plant breeders a monopoly about the distribution of their product for a fixed period, as a way to encourage investments and innovations such as varieties with higher yields or more resistant to drought or vermin.

It is a large company. Estimations of the economic impact of the seed industry in Canada vary from $ 4 billion to $ 6 billion a year.

The right to reuse

The changes would remove the right of farmers to save seeds and cuttings from protected “fruit, vegetables, decorative varieties, other plants that are reproduced by vegetative reproduction and hybrids.” For most plants that are recognized by law, the protection takes 20 years.

Personal gardens and many other types of crops such as wheat, grains and pulses, where seed savings are more widespread, would not be influenced.

One of the other proposed changes is to extend the protection of new varieties of mushrooms, asparagus and woody plants such as raspberries and blueberries up to 25 years from the current 20 years.

A public consultation about the changes runs until October 18.

NDP agricultural critic Gord Johns says that the changes are evoking an important issue for the Canadians. He wonders why the government holds the consultation in the summer, when most farmers are focused on growing and harvesting crops – do not prepare submissions for public consultations.

“They keep doing this time and time again,” said Johns of the federal government. “They announce legal changes that influence farmers and their means of subsistence [and] They plan the consultation period during the busiest time of the year for farmers. “

Johns said that companies that produce new types of seed should be sufficiently compensated for their innovation and intellectual property. But he said that farmers who grow and harvest that the food that Canadians eat cannot be ‘starved by large companies that suffocate their seed supply’.

He wants the Lower House to keep the agricultural committee hearings and view the proposed changes.

A spokesperson for Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food Heath Macdonald said that the government is “committed to encouraging innovation, investments, research and competitiveness in the Canadian agricultural, horticulture and decorative industry.”

The spokesperson said that the government will “revise all feedback before the next steps are determined.”

Access versus innovation

The government of former Prime Minister Stephen Harper led to a debate in 2015 when she took measures to bring the rules of Canada more in accordance with the guidelines of the International Union for the protection of new varieties of plants, known as UPOV 91.

The rules are independent of the agreements of patent law or technology use that some seed companies use to prevent farmers from saving and reusing seeds.

Changes in the rules of plant breeders are now on the table again. Last year a government consultation resulted in 109 entries, the majority that supports change.

In the meantime, lobbyists have been busy behind the scenes.

According to the Federal Lobby Register, 13 people from different groups or companies are currently registered for lobbying about the rights of plant breeders, including the Canadian Federation of Agriculture, the Canadian Canola Growers Association, De Fruit and Vegetable Growers Association and Swiss State company, Ownership, Ownershiped Sygenta.

Cathy Holtslander, Director of Research and Policy for the National Farmers Union, says that the proposed changes run the risk of hurting farmers, while the profit and the strength of seed-producing companies are increased, often multinationals with foreign property.

Although the changes are aimed at an area of agriculture where sperm saving is less common, Holtslander warns that the changes are a “slippery slope” that can lead to an erosion of the rights of farmers.

“If they were to go behind wheat, there would be a huge stir and people would be really angry and reduce,” said Holtslander.

She said that what is being proposed “clears the road” for other crops that would be admitted later.

“The seed industry does not want farmers’ privilege to exist for any seed. They want to demand people to buy new seeds every year,” she said.

The group of Holtslander is planning to combat the proposed changes. She said the problem goes beyond the issue of individual farmers who reuse seed.

“If the large multinational companies control the seed, they control our food supply,” she said.

Lauren Comin, policy director for Seeds Canada, acknowledges that the issue can be controversial, but claims that Canada needs strong protection of intellectual property if it wants to have access to the latest innovations to compete on the world stage.

“It is incredibly important to have these frameworks to encourage investment companies, companies, public entities to know that they are being compensated and protected in one way or another,” Comin said.

She said that although the changes “offer certainty and that stimulus for investments”, she wants them to continue.

Although there is not enough certified seed for all grains of Canada and small grains crop, Comin would also like to see farmers compensate plant breeders when they reuse seeds, such as in Europe.

“The farmer’s privilege does not say that use is free,” she said.

“[Farmers] Can choose to buy the newest and best product of innovation, which means that there is an enormous amount of investments and efforts that went to the development of this improved variety. Or they can decide that they do not appreciate innovation, and they can go back to a variety that is unprotected and that grow. “

Currie, a Ontario granes and oil trucks that save and reuse seeds, says that Canada must balance the two principles.

He says that Farmer’s privilege is the key to the competitiveness of Canada, but that also applies to access to new types of seeds and plants.

“Although I understand where some of the multinationals want better control, I believe that the industry is viable, farmers must also have some control,” he said.