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: | 03ROME2956 |
|---|---|
| Wikileaks: | View 03ROME2956 at Wikileaks.org |
| Origin: | Embassy Rome |
| Created: | 2003-06-30 10:12:00 |
| Classification: | CONFIDENTIAL |
| Tags: | EAGR ETRD IT PGOV TBIO UN |
| 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.
C O N F I D E N T I A L ROME 002956 SIPDIS STATE PASS USDA FOR FAS ITP/MACKE AND OFSTS/RICHEY STATE PASS USTR GENEVA FOR USTR E.O. 12958: DECL: 06/30/2013 TAGS: EAGR, ETRD, IT, PGOV, TBIO, UN SUBJECT: GOI MINISTERS ASSERT SAFETY AND IMPORTANCE OF BIOTECH PRODUCTS Classified By: Economic Minister-Counselor Scott Kilner for reasons 1.5 (b) (d) 1. (SBU) Summary. At the annual assembly of Assobiotec (Italy,s national association of biotechnology companies) held in Rome on June 10, 2003, Minister of Productive Activities Antonio Marzano and Minister of Health Girolamo Sirchia addressed the importance of the sector to Italy,s future. They stressed the safety of biotech and the importance of biotechnology to the developing world. Dr. Adriano de Maio, Rector of LUISS University, and Dr. Claudio Bordignon, Scientific Director of Fondazione San Raffaele described the current plight of biotechnology research and development capacity in Italy. Despite these welcome words, there is still no consensus about biotech policy within the GOI cabinet, and we are not confident of gaining a policy breakthrough in the short term. End summary. 2. (U) CDA Skodon delivered opening remarks focusing mainly on the US trade dispute with the European Union over the moratorium on Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs). He cited the fact that even the Commission recognizes that there are no known negative effects on human health and that the moratorium prevents developing countries from reaping the benefits of innovative agricultural technologies. In addition, he expressed his hope that the Italian Presidency of the EU will take the lead to give European consumers the right to choose to buy biotech products. 3. (U) Minister of Productive Activities Marzano discussed the costs and benefits of biotechnology, citing benefits such as new drugs, new vaccines, new therapies, and new diagnostic instruments. He stressed the fact that the drawbacks of biotechnology have not been substantiated and are founded on political references and anti-American feelings. He emphasized that we face death from starvation in the developing world if we turn away from agricultural biotechnology. In addition, Italy and Europe risk becoming consumers, rather than producers, of biotechnology research. He stressed the need to keep Italian researchers in Italy and to attract foreign researchers. 4. (C) Marzano,s remarks were apparently influenced by a June 4 internal memo on agricultural biotech from Director General for Commercial Agreements Amedeo Teti to Vice Minister of Productive Activities (Foreign Trade) Adolfo Urso. Teti,s paper, a copy of which was obtained by the Embassy (please strictly protect), reiterates familiar themes covered in recent bilateral discussions, including the possibility that the U.S. request for WTO consultations on the EU moratorium on biotech approvals could spur the GOI to adopt a unified position on agricultural biotech. The flip side of a unified policy, according to Teti, would be the GOI,s improved ability to manage the issue during its EU presidency, especially given the upcoming WTO ministerial meeting in Cancun. He also called for the GOI to work towards formulating a U.S.-EU compromise on ag biotech, in which a less restrictive EU policy would be matched by U.S. support for greater protection of geographic indications (though Teti acknowledged continued U.S. opposition to expandng GI protections). Teti further advocated greater GOI leadership on ag biotech to make Italy compettive with other more pro-GMO EU member states. Te expected results would include more foreign inestment in the Italian biotech sector, and incresed biotech research and development by Italian SMEs (which, in contrast to large corporations, geerally cannot shift biotech activity to more bioech-friendly areas outside of the EU). 5.(U) Miister of Health Sirchia addressed the Assobiotec meeting on the lack of evidence of any harm to human health of agricultural biotechnology. He notedthat genetic modification has happened naturallyover hundreds of years and there is no proof tha genetic modification over milliseconds has a diferent effect. Protective measures should only b considered when the evidence could prove otherwse. Minister Sirchia also spoke of the importance f linking industry to research in universities t make better use of the resources allocated to tis sector. 6.(U) Dr. Adriano De Maio and Dr. Cladio Bordignon both discussed the more academic apects of the biotech sector stating that there is very little funding for biotech research activities in Italy. A fundamental problem is the lack of a concentration of and funding for research centers--centers of excellence like the NIH and NSF in the U.S. These centers would, in their opinion, give a much-needed focus for biotech research and increase efficiency. The importance of synthesis between academics, research, and industry was also highlighted. 7.(C) Embassy comment: On a day when Italian journalists were on strike and coverage minimal, the two most pro-biotech ministers of the Berlusconi government preached to an audience of the converted. In addition, a half-dozen or so Italian Parliamentarians and a number of representatives from scientific institutions were identified by name. The ministers provided a welcome focus on the impact of unreasonable concerns about biotech products on funding for biotech research and, as importantly, the sorry state of biotechnology companies in Italy, which are near dead last in Europe in number and amount of investment capital. Still, we see little evidence that a breakthrough on GOI biotech policy is likely due to continued opposition by other members of the government, notably Agricultural Minister Alemanno. We therefore hold out no great hope for decisive Italian leadership during the upcoming EU Presidency. 8.(U) This cable was prepared by Science Section intern Lisa George. SEMBLER Sembler NNNN 2003ROME02956 - Classification: CONFIDENTIAL
Latest source of this page is cablebrowser-2, released 2011-10-04