Disclaimer: This site has been first put up 15 years ago. Since then I would probably do a couple things differently, but because I've noticed this site had been linked from news outlets, PhD theses and peer rewieved papers and because I really hate the concept of "digital dark age" I've decided to put it back up. There's no chance it can produce any harm now.
| Identifier: | 05ANKARA862 |
|---|---|
| Wikileaks: | View 05ANKARA862 at Wikileaks.org |
| Origin: | Embassy Ankara |
| Created: | 2005-02-15 11:37:00 |
| Classification: | UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY |
| Tags: | EAGR ETRD TBIO KPAO TU |
| Redacted: | This cable was not redacted by Wikileaks. |
This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available. 151137Z Feb 05
UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 ANKARA 000862 SIPDIS DEPT FOR EB/TPP/ABT, IIP/T/ES, EUR/SE USTR FOR LERRION/BPECK USDOC FOR ITA/MAC/DDEFALCO USDA FOR FAS/OA/BIG BSIMMONS, PSPENCER, JPPASSINO SENSITIVE E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: EAGR, ETRD, TBIO, KPAO, TU SUBJECT: SENIOR BIOTECH ADVISOR'S MEETINGS WITH TURKISH OFFICIALS AND AGRIBUSINESS Ref: 2004 Ankara 6772 Summary ------- 1. (SBU) In meetings with GOT officials and private sector organizations, State's Senior Agricultural Biotech Advisor raised U.S. concerns about the potential of Turkey's draft biosafety law to hinder trade and development, and provided an overview of U.S. biotechnology policies, particularly with respect to the EU's regulatory approach. GOT interlocutors stressed that the draft law was being developed with extensive stakeholder input, and that it would be submitted to Parliament by the end of March. However, business representatives believe that in its current form the legislation could have disastrous consequences not only for trade, but for Turkish agribusiness. Business representatives suggested that high-profile USG advocacy on this issue could be counterproductive. USDA/FAS comments were passed to key officials in the Ministry of Agriculture and Parliament. Embassy recommends that Washington agencies again review the draft law specifically for consistency with Turkey's WTO commitments. End Summary. 2. (U) Madelyn Spirnak, State's Senior Advisor for Agricultural Biotechnology met with GOT officials, parliamentarians, local farm and trade associations, academic and industry representatives in Ankara and Istanbul January 31 - February 3 to discuss the current status of Turkey's biosafety regulations and to promote science-based, pro-development policies in this area. Accompanied by FAS and ECON, Spirnak met with the Agriculture Undersecretary, three parliamentarians on the Agriculture Committee, the Head of Department of the Agricultural Research General Directorate (TAGEM), the Vice President of the Scientific and Technical Research Institute (TUBITAK); senior officials of the Treasury U/S responsible for investment policy; and officials at the Environment Ministry and the State Planning Organization. She also met with former International Visitor Program participants, Fulbright alumni and other academics; representatives of the poultry, seed, feed associations; the farmers' union; U.S. agribusiness; the Turkish Industrialists and Businessmen's Association (TUSIAD); and gave an interview to Turkish daily Referans, published on February 5. 3. (SBU) In these meetings, Spirnak raised USG concerns about aspects of Turkey's draft biosafety regulation which could hinder trade and development. She provided an update on the U.S. case in the WTO against the EU biotechnology moratorium, and explained U.S. concerns on European traceability and labeling regulations. Emphasizing the important role agricultural biotechnology can play in encouraging environmentally-friendly economic growth, Spirnak provided an overview of global biotechnology trends, including increases in cultivation and new studies on the benefits of biotechnology to developing country farmers. TURKEY'S BIOTECH LAW NEARING COMPLETION --------------------------------------- 4. (SBU) According to GOT officials, Turkish biosafety legislation will soon be sent to the Prime Minister's Office, and then to the Parliament. GOT and trade sources expect the law to be sent in its current form to the Parliament by the end of March. The Agriculture U/S and Vehbi Eser, a Head of Department within TAGEM and the Chair of the Interagency Biotech Committee, stressed that the GOT was going to great lengths to take into account the views of all stakeholders by posting the draft law on the Internet and holding a series of outreach meetings around Turkey to discuss it. Eser pointed out provisions in the draft law which would fast-track biotech applications for products approved by foreign regulatory authorities, including those in the U.S. Note: FAS has emailed copies of the latest draft of the legislation to Washington agencies. End Note. 5. (SBU) Other agencies also shared their views. An expert in the State Planning Office stressed that, in drafting the law, the GOT was attempting not only to implement the Cartagena Protocol, but also to incorporate elements of relevant EU directives and to protect biodiversity in Turkey. Tubitak's Vice President hinted that his agency was reluctant to take a high profile position on an issue as controversial as biotech, although it was supporting some limited research. Treasury's Deputy U/S expressed interest in learning more about the developmental benefits of adopting biotech and the potential fiscal cost of the new law's extensive testing requirements. They asked for copies of USDA/FAS comments on the draft law and said they would be more active in interagency discussions. Law's Impact on Trade and Turkish Agriculture --------------------------------------------- 6. (U) Business representatives were very concerned about several aspects of the current biosafety draft. They maintained that, despite GOT assurances to the contrary, the legislation will disrupt trade and all agricultural industries. If strictly implemented, industry sources indicated that the feed and poultry industry will not be able to operate. The legislation even threatens to disrupt the importation of conventional parent seeds due to the excessive liability provisions and expected extremely low tolerance levels for adventitious presence (industry reports a 0.3 percent AP level). 7. (SBU) Industry is scrambling to lobby the GOT with their concerns and to prevent the creation of an autonomous biotechnology agency in the Turkish Government. In the meantime, anti-biotech groups are complaining that the law is too lenient and will allow GMOs to flood the country. Optimistic observers hope that Parliament may not act on the measure immediately or may make significant changes to the law. Industry representatives, speaking through their food manufacturers association, thanked Spirnak and the Embassy for lobbying to date, but requested that the USG refrain from continued intensive activity on the issue lest those actions become counterproductive - both politically and in terms of public perception. Background on Legislation ------------------------- 8. (U) The drafting of the biosafety legislation has been in progress for over one year, and was initiated by Turkey's signing of the Cartagena Biosafety Protocol. Unfortunately, Turkey's official expertise in the sector appears to be limited to one key individual - the Head of Dept of the Biotechnology Group at TAGEM - who has controlled the direction and restrictive nature of the legislation and is expected to angle for the position of head of the new biotechnology agency While claiming that the law is based on the U.S. risk assessment principles as well as EU Directives, there are several elements of the law that are intended to satisfy a small yet vocal group of anti-GMO NGOs. For example, liability and penalty provisions in the law specify that importers and handlers of GMOS are liable for any environmental or health claims up to 30 years after the product is introduced. Penalty provisions are likewise quite strict and would prevent most businessmen and farmers from signing all of the various applications and permits required. 9. (U) Since the law creates an independent biosafety agency, industry is rightly concerned that the bureaucratic burden of applications, permits and testing will be time consuming and expensive and they worry about possibilities for corruption. The fee structure laid out in the law is quite excessive. In addition to the various application and testing fees, the law allows for a 0.03 percent fee levied on all imports of materials developed through biotechnology. Comment/Action Recommendation ----------------------------- 10. (U) Ms. Spirnak's visit, including her outreach to the press, business, and parliamentarians, was very useful in helping Post broaden the vigorous debate on the draft law and educate potential stakeholders about how their interests could be advantaged through biotechnology or disadvantaged through a restrictive, non-science based regulatory process. The emotional public discussion of this subject remains, however, deeply distorted by misinformation and disinformation. 11. (SBU) Embassy FAS, Economic and Public Affairs sections will continue to work with constituents to provide updated and accurate information relevant to biotechnology. We appreciate the Department's decision to fund a U.S. speaker through EB and IIP on the developmental and environmental benefits of adopting science-based biotech policies, and look forward to the Department's suggestions on possible candidates. We will also approach TUBITAK's "Bilim ve Teknik" popular monthly science magazine about the possibility of providing information for an article on some positive aspect of agricultural biotechnology. Embassy recommends that Washington agencies again review Turkey's draft biosafety law specifically for compliance with WTO commitments as soon as possible and provide talking points for use with GOT and parliamentary officials. 12. (U) The Senior Agricultural Biotechnology Advisor has cleared this cable. Edelman
Latest source of this page is cablebrowser-2, released 2011-10-04