[PASSED] GMO International Trade Accord

[Heavens Reach]

Pursuant to our deeply held concerns over the potential ramifications of subclause a of clause 4, we will be submitting a vote of AGAINST in the matter of GMO International Trade Accord, and will support a repeal, even in the absence of a replacement.

[Potted Plants United]

The hivemind's strange, even creepy, presumably bipedal ambassador creature stepped into the debate chamber.

"As the "sterilized GMO" and similar usage are not actually defined, for my own part I am going to assume that such refer to the genomes of GMO organisms, which have had the payload of ancient viral genes and dysfunctional genomes removed, thus sterilizing them in the sense of disinfection. This does not mean suicide seeds, though of course most of my plants - whether self-plants or those I create for others - do not need to produce pollen to produce seeds, so they are unlikely to in any way "pollute" the genomes of other plants to begin with. Honestly, if that possible genomic pollution is the main concern, eliminating the production of and need for pollen is much less problematic ethically, than suicide seeds are. Though it may feel like a small cry of defiance especially when this does not actually impact me or my businesses, I have still voted against, due to the inaccuracies and woolly wording."

OOC: Yes, Araraukar is in IC in the WA, but OOCly only this account is. And no the two nations don't agree ICly on this being a good thing, whether or not it actually has any impact on them.

[Slackertown]

I cannot believe something this scientifically flawed even made it to vote.

[Heavens Reach]

The hivemind's strange, even creepy, presumably bipedal ambassador creature stepped into the debate chamber.

"As the "sterilized GMO" and similar usage are not actually defined, for my own part I am going to assume that such refer to the genomes of GMO organisms, which have had the payload of ancient viral genes and dysfunctional genomes removed, thus sterilizing them in the sense of disinfection. This does not mean suicide seeds, though of course most of my plants - whether self-plants or those I create for others - do not need to produce pollen to produce seeds, so they are unlikely to in any way "pollute" the genomes of other plants to begin with. Honestly, if that possible genomic pollution is the main concern, eliminating the production of and need for pollen is much less problematic ethically, than suicide seeds are. Though it may feel like a small cry of defiance especially when this does not actually impact me or my businesses, I have still voted against, due to the inaccuracies and woolly wording."

OOC: Yes, Araraukar is in IC in the WA, but OOCly only this account is. And no the two nations don't agree ICly on this being a good thing, whether or not it actually has any impact on them.

Unfortunately, ambassador, even sterile plants have methods of cross-contaminating the genetics of other organisms, and even where they don't, they can outcompete other organisms, only to fall to a later blight and eliminate the foodstuff entirely in the worst case scenario.

OOC: It almost happened IRL to bananas. And a similar, though not identical, process enabled the Irish potato famine.

[Cretox State]

"Incredible. While we certainly appreciate the attention, we must wonder where all you well-intentioned people were for the last... three weeks or so."

We do commend the proposal as it is an important step in biological research, possibilities, and further advancement of our nations. Yet, we have a reason for concern on one point. Clause 4a states; said policies must permit the use of sterilized plant GMOs in cases where the environmental benefit of using sterilized plant GMOs would clearly outweigh any downsides of their use.

To us this sounds like a, due to lack of better words, sneaky way to implement a mandatory use of GMOs. We are free to set our own policies on GMOs, but those policies must contain the legality and use of GMOs.

Because of this clause we are currently against the proposal.

"Where are you getting 'mandatory use' from? The proposal simply mandates that they be legalized in certain circumstances. Do you believe that farmers cannot be trusted to make their own decisions as to what seeds they buy? Nothing in this proposal makes sterilized GMOs 'mandatory'."

"Sterilized plant GMOs are specifically designed to prevent transmission of these plants' genetic traits into wild relatives, reducing negative impacts to biodiversity. In exchange for that, the farmers will have to buy new seeds after every crop season and increase companies' profits, because sterilized GMO seeds cannot be resown. In summary, the author is willing to trade farmers' income for environmental benefits, even if it boosts companies' profits.

Hmmm... sounds like a corporate agenda, or a well-intentioned move that will indirectly benefit companies."

"How, exactly, will farmers be forced to buy new seeds? Non-sterile seeds aren't being outlawed."

said policies must permit the use of sterilized plant GMOs in cases where the environmental benefit of using sterilized plant GMOs would clearly outweigh any downsides of their use

As other ambassadors have pointed out, this is the fly in the ointment. Did this really deserve the weight of a mandate? The gross effects of sterilized seed usage, and their containability, are not even well-established in the literature at this point.

"Sterilization is a valid method to prevent cross pollination and alleviate some environmental concerns."

I cannot believe something this scientifically flawed even made it to vote.

"Please elaborate."

[Honeydewistania]

"How, exactly, will farmers be forced to buy new seeds? Non-sterile seeds aren't being outlawed."

"Farmers that use sterile seeds will have to buy new sterile seeds. If they buy non-sterile seeds after buying sterile seeds, it almost pretty much defeats the purpose of sowing suicide seeds in the first place."

[Potted Plants United]

Unfortunately, ambassador, even sterile plants have methods of cross-contaminating the genetics of other organisms, and even where they don't, they can outcompete other organisms, only to fall to a later blight and eliminate the foodstuff entirely in the worst case scenario.

OOC: It almost happened IRL to bananas. And a similar, though not identical, process enabled the Irish potato famine.

IC: "Of course anything is possible if you are careless with the code that makes plants capable of feats no animal could hope to surpass. You must manage not only genomes but proteomes as well. But it is doable. Also, isn't outcompeting other organisms the entire point of farming for a certain crop? You want to be able to harvest what you have sown. The blight situation you describe would happen anyway, whether the plant was capable of producing pollen or not, if it happened in the way you think it would. How would suicide seeds solve any of that? You would still need to provide the farmers with blight-proof variants."

OOC: Do note that the hivemind can do at will alterations to its self-plants' genomes, gene expression and cell functions.

Also, modern banana is a bad example as it's a naturally sterile hybrid of two species, not a GMO. And the potato thing is only an example of blight, not suicide seeds or GMO.

"Incredible. While we certainly appreciate the attention, we must wonder where all you well-intentioned people were for the last... three weeks or so."

OOC: Having a life?

[Picairn]

"How, exactly, will farmers be forced to buy new seeds? Non-sterile seeds aren't being outlawed."

"Sterilized GMO seeds, when growing into new plants, will only produce infertile offsprings, rendering the entire second-generation seeds to be unable to germinate. That's why sterilized seeds are also called "single-use seeds", as the second-generation seeds can't be sown. If the sterilization technology is commercialized, corporations will likely incorporate sterility genes into all their seeds. That’s because genetic seed sterilization would secure a much stronger monopoly than patents — instead of suing farmers for saving seed, companies are trying to make it biologically impossible for farmers to re-use harvested seed. Farmers' increased dependence on sterile seeds from corporations, to me, is a bad thing.

TL;DR: Sterilized seeds are like single-use seeds, self-destruct after a crop season. Farmers can not save their seeds for the next and will have to buy new seeds from corporations. Not all farmers are rich enough to buy new seeds season after season, and this can have an impact upon poorer farmers.

Of course, such seeds have environmental benefits: that self-destruct feature would prevent contamination and cross-pollination of GMO crops into wild relatives, reducing negative effects on the native habitat.

Picairn will still vote For because of other useful regulations, but we want to notify you of the potential harm this will cause to farmers."

https://gmo.geneticliteracyproject.org/ ... tor-seeds/

[Potted Plants United]

*snip*

*snip*

OOC: It's also worth being aware of this resolution and its repeal.

[Picairn]

OOC: It's also worth being aware of this resolution and its repeal.

The resolution correctly identified the problems, but the solutions are too draconian. The repeal makes sense.

[Potted Plants United]

OOC: It's also worth being aware of this resolution and its repeal.

The resolution correctly identified the problems, but the solutions are too draconian. The repeal makes sense.

OOC: I feel like going "Yes. And?" because the reason I posted it was more to point out that suicide seeds have already once been deemed to be a bad thing by the WA and that if this passes and is repealed, it's probably worth writing up a resolution to in some way restrict their use in agribusiness. More a FYI to you and Cretox State, not a comment to anything you said (hence the "snip"s).

[Heavens Reach]

"Sterilization is a valid method to prevent cross pollination and alleviate some environmental concerns."

Ambassador, it's a highly experiment technology with few long term studies, and some concerning short term studies, that the proposal unilaterally mandates as if the consequences are well-established and easily predicted.

[Heavens Reach]

Also, modern banana is a bad example as it's a naturally sterile hybrid of two species, not a GMO. And the potato thing is only an example of blight, not suicide seeds or GMO.

OOC: hybridization is a form of genetic modification. The link between the banana, and the potato, and the sterile seed is the danger of monoculture, when farmers replace all of the genetically varied natural plantlife with a single infertile culture (e.g. bananas, again.)

[Picairn]

OOC: I feel like going "Yes. And?" because the reason I posted it was more to point out that suicide seeds have already once been deemed to be a bad thing by the WA and that if this passes and is repealed, it's probably worth writing up a resolution to in some way restrict their use in agribusiness. More a FYI to you and Cretox State, not a comment to anything you said (hence the "snip"s).

Can we build a resolution regulating sterilized GMO plants on top of this? The proposal only legalize sterilized plants under certain circumstances, and we can improve on the details.

[Ardiveds]

Also, modern banana is a bad example as it's a naturally sterile hybrid of two species, not a GMO. And the potato thing is only an example of blight, not suicide seeds or GMO.

OOC: hybridization is a form of genetic modification. The link between the banana, and the potato, and the sterile seed is the danger of monoculture, when farmers replace all of the genetically varied natural plantlife with a single infertile culture (e.g. bananas, again.)

OOC: Aren't most plant stuff we eat genetically modified? Everything like almost all fruits and most vegetables are no where close to their wild variants anymore. So how are these genetically diverse anymore?

[Cretox State]

"Sterilization is a valid method to prevent cross pollination and alleviate some environmental concerns."

Ambassador, it's a highly experiment technology with few long term studies, and some concerning short term studies, that the proposal unilaterally mandates as if the consequences are well-established and easily predicted.

"Except the proposal does not mandate the use of sterilized seeds. Are you telling me that farmers will somehow be forced to purchase genetically modified sterilized crops?"

Edit:

OOC: I feel like going "Yes. And?" because the reason I posted it was more to point out that suicide seeds have already once been deemed to be a bad thing by the WA and that if this passes and is repealed, it's probably worth writing up a resolution to in some way restrict their use in agribusiness. More a FYI to you and Cretox State, not a comment to anything you said (hence the "snip"s).

Can we build a resolution regulating sterilized GMO plants on top of this? The proposal only legalize sterilized plants under certain circumstances, and we can improve on the details.

OOC: Gensec has historically allowed for more specific legislation in an already covered area IIRC. This proposal only covers sterilization itself and the use of sterilized plant GMOs, not their trade, sale, marking, alternatives, etc.

Edit 2:

"Incredible. While we certainly appreciate the attention, we must wonder where all you well-intentioned people were for the last... three weeks or so."

OOC: Having a life?

Funny how that works.

[Chairman Cities]

As Many Are Finding Fault With The Proposal The W.A. Delegation For The Illuminati Will Watch Closely The Outcome And Will Decide Accordingly.

[Picairn]

"Picairn recommends that all of us should still vote For the proposal. The issue with Clause 4a can be resolved with an additional resolution regulating sterilized GMOs."

[Ardiveds]

"Picairn recommends that all of us should still vote For the proposal. The issue with Clause 4a can be resolved with an additional resolution regulating sterilized GMOs."

"Look at the votes Ambassador, the people voicing thier concerns heres seem to be a vocal minority. The chances of this propsal failing seem quite unlikely."

[Honeydewistania]

"Picairn recommends that all of us should still vote For the proposal. The issue with Clause 4a can be resolved with an additional resolution regulating sterilized GMOs."

"Look at the votes Ambassador, the people voicing thier concerns heres seem to be a vocal minority. The chances of this propsal failing seem quite unlikely."

"A repeal on the other hand..."

[Picairn]

"Look at the votes Ambassador, the people voicing thier concerns heres seem to be a vocal minority. The chances of this propsal failing seem quite unlikely."

"Right, I only put that recommendation forward to assuage the concerns of said vocal minority. Now we only need another resolution regulating sterilized GMOs, and it'll be perfect."

[Caseus imperium magnus]

"Look at the votes Ambassador, the people voicing thier concerns heres seem to be a vocal minority. The chances of this propsal failing seem quite unlikely."

"Right, I only put that recommendation forward to assuage the concerns of said vocal minority. Now we only need another resolution regulating sterilized GMOs, and it'll be perfect."

except it wont, as

providing funding to member nations for the purpose of implementing measures pursuant to this resolution, in the event that the member nations in question are demonstrably unable to otherwise implement such measures due to economic limitations;

there is barely anything laid out for this. it is ripe for abuse

[Kenmoria]

"Right, I only put that recommendation forward to assuage the concerns of said vocal minority. Now we only need another resolution regulating sterilized GMOs, and it'll be perfect."

except it wont, as

providing funding to member nations for the purpose of implementing measures pursuant to this resolution, in the event that the member nations in question are demonstrably unable to otherwise implement such measures due to economic limitations;

there is barely anything laid out for this. it is ripe for abuse

(OOC: It is quite a small section, but I can’t see any potential for abuse. A member nation being ‘demonstrably unable to otherwise implement’ isn’t very subjective, and seems fairly clear to me. The funds are additionally only for the purpose of ‘implementing measures pursuant to this resolution’, which is also quite clear.)

[Picairn]

except it wont, as

providing funding to member nations for the purpose of implementing measures pursuant to this resolution, in the event that the member nations in question are demonstrably unable to otherwise implement such measures due to economic limitations;

there is barely anything laid out for this. it is ripe for abuse

"What abuse are you referring to?"

[Honeydewistania]

except it wont, as


there is barely anything laid out for this. it is ripe for abuse

(OOC: It is quite a small section, but I can’t see any potential for abuse. A member nation being ‘demonstrably unable to otherwise implement’ isn’t very subjective, and seems fairly clear to me. The funds are additionally only for the purpose of ‘implementing measures pursuant to this resolution’, which is also quite clear.)

Oops, didn’t read the pursuant to resolution part. Carry on.