Archives: Press Releases

Brussels – Proposals from the European Commission to reform the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) after 2013 show signs of fairer distribution of subsidies, according to the coalition. [1]

Despite this positive development the communication came short on proposals for stopping the collapse of family farming in Europe and dumping in developing countries, according to the coalition. The plans outlined also fail to address correctly climate change and the protection of biodiversity.

The communication from the European Commission lays out a range of laudable goals for reforming agriculture in Europe but fails to make strong proposals by only “adapting’ the current tools. Furthermore, it makes clear that the CAP 2013 proposal based on global competitiveness will let down its own farmers and consumers.

The communication suggests some elements for social improvements such as a ceiling for direct payments linked to employment, payments for small farms, and the maintenance of payments coupled to production to sustain farms in disadvantaged rural areas. However, proposals show that the European Commission continues to believe that agriculture and food markets are efficient and that “competitiveness” delivers a fair solution. The European and global crisis have shown the contrary: “free” market orientation and international trade rules have failed.

The coalition believes that a real reform is needed to promote environmental and socially responsible forms of farming, strengthening food production to feed people in their own regions, instead of export oriented and import dependent model, as well as promoting sustainable family farms instead of large industrialized units. This reform requires regulatory tools such as supply management, intervention and public storage in case of conjunctural sectorial crisis and border regulation to avoid low cost imports.

To face the big challenges for the environment, local production cycles can respond to the future scarcity and pollution of natural resources. The latter requires support of good agricultural practices, including animal welfare requirements on all farms, not just cross compliance linked with direct payments1. An agricultural model focused first on domestic market, both here and in the developing countries, is better for farmers in Europe and worldwide. The CAP should reward environmental sustainability, stop supporting unsustainable practices and achieve a balanced development of territories by including support for rural employment, diversity of food systems and locally grown production.

At this stage, the communication does not measure up to the expectations of food sovereignty, income and employment in agriculture, sustainable management practices and protection of natural resources. Real tools for supply management and market regulations are essential and will require strong political will to challenge the framework and the policies of international agreements. The coalition of farmers’ groups, social movements and NGOs in Europe call for a Common Agricultural and Food Policy for consumers and farmers in Europe and worldwide, not for the export-oriented food industry.

Get the whole statement and list of organizations.

For more information please contact:

ECVC: Geneviève Savigny (Fr, En) :+33 (0)625551687 [email protected] and ECVC/ COAG : Andoni García Arriola (ES), +34636451569 [email protected] – Paulina Novo (Es, En), European movement for food sovereigntyandanotherCAP+31(0)[email protected], GertEngelen(Nl,Fr,En,Es),Vredeseilanden+32 (0) 49738137, [email protected] Stanka Becheva (Ge,En,Bu), Friends of the Earth Europe +32(0)28931000, [email protected] – Willy Schuster (Ro,Hu,Ge,En) – Eco Ruralis Association + 40 (0)752108184 [email protected] Irmi Salzer (Ge) – Agrarbündnis Österreich (Au) +43 69911827634, [email protected] – Jocelyn Parot, Urgenci (FR ENG FIN), 0033687044930, [email protected] – Andrea Ferrante (it,En,fr,es) Italian Committee for Food Sovereignty, +39 348 01 89 221, [email protected]
___________________________________________
1 Indeed ,despite present cross compliance, factory farms continue to develop

Déclaration de la Directrice Executive de Food & Water Europe, Wenonah Hauter

Bruxelles – Cette semaine, un tribunal français a rejeté la poursuite pour diffamation intentée par Suez contre le film documentaire FLOW. Food & Water Europe applaudit le tribunal pour sa défense du droit des médias à examiner les activités des sociétés multinationales, en particulier lorsque ces activités compromettent la capacité de millions de personnes à travers le monde à accéder à une ressource naturelle vitale.

« Avec 1,2 milliard de personnes dans le monde qui n’ont pas accès à l’eau potable, propre et abordable, il est inadmissible qu’une société aussi puissante que Suez utilise son influence considérable pour masquer les faits derrière cette crise. »

«Bien sûr, compte tenu des performances exécrables de la société dans la gestion des ressources en eau, leur réaction au film est bien moins surprenante. De la Bolivie à l’Indonésie, Suez a laissé une traînée de débordements d’eaux usées, d’eau potable contaminée, de dégradation d’infrastructure, de scandales politiques et bien d’autres exemples encore de gestion bâclée à la suite de sa tentative de tirer profit des systèmes d’eau locale dans le monde entier. »

«Nous espérons que cette décision incitera citoyens et militants à se joindre à Food & Water Europe dans la poursuite de notre mission visant à exposer et contester les abus de ressources essentielles comme l’eau publique dans le monde. »

Food & Water Europe est un programme de Food & Water Watch, une ONG à but non-lucratif représentant les droits des consommateurs basée à Washington, DC, qui vise à garantir une eau propre et une alimentation sûre en Europe et dans le monde. Nous luttons contre le contrôle et l’abus de nos aliments et des ressources en eau par l’industrie en donnant aux citoyens les moyens d’agir et de transformer la conscience collective autour de ce que nous mangeons et buvons.

Contact: Gabriella Zanzanaini, +32488409662, gzanzanaini(at)fweurope.org

Statement of Food & Water Europe Executive Director Wenonah Hauter

Brussels – This week, a French court rejected a defamation lawsuit brought by Suez Water against the documentary film FLOW. Food & Water Europe applauds the court for its commitment to upholding the rights of the media to scrutinize the activities of multinational corporations, especially when those activities compromise the ability of millions of people around the world to access a vital natural resource.

“With 1.2 billion people around the world lacking access to safe, clean, affordable water, it is unconscionable that a company as powerful as Suez would choose to use its considerable influence to obscure the facts behind this crisis.

“Of course, given the company’s checkered performance in water resource management, their reaction to the film is less than surprising. From Bolivia to Indonesia, Suez has left a trail of sewage overflows, contaminated drinking water, decaying infrastructure, political scandals and other examples of botched management in the wake of its attempt to profit off of local water systems around the globe.

“We hope this decision will inspire activists to join Food & Water Europe as we continue our mission to expose and challenge the abuse of essential public water resources around the world.”

Food & Water Europe is a program of Food & Water Watch, Inc., a non-profit consumer NGO based in Washington, D.C., working to ensure clean water and safe food in Europe and around the world. We challenge the corporate control and abuse of our food and water resources by empowering people to take action and transforming the public consciousness about what we eat and drink.

Contact: Gabriella Zanzanaini, +32488409662, gzanzanaini(at)fweurope.org

Brussels – Food & Water Europe welcomes the initiative of five MEPs who today launched a written declaration in the European Parliament to fight the privatisation of water resources. Together the MEPs, Giommaria Uggias, François Alfonsi, Véronique de Keyser, João Ferreira and Niccolò Rinaldi have reaffirmed the importance of the protection of water as a public asset.

“Claims that privatization would bring efficiency and better service have not materialized,” says Food & Water Europe Executive Director Wenonah Hauter. “Instead, we have seen communities suffering from numerous problems including poor maintenance and rising bills, demonstrating why the movement to stop the privatization of water is gaining momentum around the world.”

The privatization of water began in Europe, but this so-called “French Model” of private water management is being rejected on its home turf. Numerous municipalities around France are fighting for a return to public water, and in one of the most high-profile cases, its capital Paris ended its contract with Veolia and returned to public water this year.

Elsewhere around Europe, a similar trend has been brewing; in Italy more than 1.4 million people signed a petition calling for a referendum against the privatization of their water services.

The failures of water privatization don’t stop at Europe. In the United States, the city of Atlanta ended its water contract with United Water 16 years early due to delayed repairs, lost jobs, inadequate responses to emergencies and charges to the city for work not done.

In Latin America, in La Paz and El Alto, Bolivia, privatization of public water services (pushed by the World Bank and IMF) worsened access to water for poor communities who couldn’t pay. In Cochabamba, Bolivia, after a week of multiple protests, the president of Bolivia was forced to terminate its water privatization contract with Aguas del Tunari, a subsidiary of Bechtel.

“The privatization of water has simply been a failure everywhere in the world. It has failed in the global south, it has failed in the United States and it is not working in the EU,” says Wenonah Hauter, Executive Director of Food & Water Europe.

“It is crucial that all MEPs in the European Parliament sign this written declaration to send a clear message that water is not for profit and that access to water needs to be protected as an affordable public good and part of the global commons,” urged Gabriella Zanzanaini, Director of European Affairs for Food & Water Europe.

Food & Water Europe is a program of Food & Water Watch, Inc., a non-profit consumer NGO based in Washington, D.C., working to ensure clean water and safe food in Europe and around the world. We challenge the corporate control and abuse of our food and water resources by empowering people to take action and transforming the public consciousness about what we eat and drink.

Contact: Gabriella Zanzanaini, +32488409662, gzanzanaini(at)fweurope.org

Food & Water Watch urges ban on arsenic in chicken feed; kicks off education campaign in Maryland

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Chicken has become ubiquitous in the American diet, with consumption tripling since the 1940s. Yet most people have no idea the meat they’re eating could be contaminated with one of the most well-known poisons in the world, according to a new report by consumer advocacy group Food & Water Watch.

Poison-Free Poultry: Why Arsenic Doesn’t Belong on Chicken Feed exposes the dangerous, widespread use of arsenic in the poultry industry and calls on Congress and the FDA to take action to update antiquated rules and protect consumers. In tandem, Food & Water Watch begins a campaign in Maryland to educate consumers and demand legislative action to end the use of arsenic in chicken production.

“The FDA approved this drug when FDR was president. Since then, the science has shown it’s a dangerous, unnecessary contaminant to our food supply,” said Wenonah Hauter, Executive Director of Food & Water Watch. “Europe does not use arsenic, and it’s time for the U.S. to step up and ban the drug as well.”

The U.S. poultry industry has used drugs containing arsenic, a known poison, to control the common intestinal disease, coccidiosis, since it was approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 1944. Despite the average American’s annual chicken consumption tripling from less than 20 pounds in the 1940s to nearly 60 pounds in 2008, the FDA hasn’t revised its allowed levels for arsenic residues in poultry since 1951.

Additionally, new studies show that arsenic residues may be higher in chicken meat than previously known. USDA data suggests that the typical American is eating between 2.13 and 8.07 micrograms of total arsenic per day through consumption of chicken meat.

The report compiles extensive research showing that chronic arsenic exposure increases the risk of cancer, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, neurological deficits and other health problems.

Direct exposure to arsenic through chicken meat is not the only risk associated with the unchecked use of arsenic in livestock production. The arsenic that doesn’t stay behind in poultry makes its way into poultry waste – leading to contamination of soil, water and crops.

The report cites research that estimates that 2 million pounds of the arsenic-based drug roxarsone is fed to chickens each year, contaminating much of the estimated 26 to 51 billion pounds of poultry waste produced. Most of that waste, about 90 percent, is then spread across fields as fertilizer, which provides a direct pathway for arsenic to contaminate soil, water and crops. Furthermore, bacteria in chicken litter can convert the arsenic in the waste to more dangerous forms than those originally used in feed.

“The science shows the use of arsenic in chicken feed is dangerous and that you can raise chickens without it, “ said Hauter. “The FDA needs to stand up to the big chicken companies and make public health a priority.”

The report outlines the shared responsibility by the FDA, USDA and EPA for fixing a fragmented, antiquated system to regulate arsenic. Two pieces of legislation are currently under consideration: Representative Steve Israel (D-NY) introduced the “Poison-Free Poultry Act” in Congress in 2009 and in 2010, a bill to prohibit the use of arsenic in animal feed was introduced in the Maryland State Legislature.

The report highlights the heightened potential for exposure to arsenic found on the Delmarva Peninsula, which includes Delaware and the Eastern Shore of Maryland and Virginia.

The report concludes with recommendations for the FDA, USDA and EPA to mitigate the damage already caused by arsenic use in livestock feed and calls for a ban on future use of arsenic for livestock production.

Get more information on the Maryland campaign.

The full report can be downloaded here.

Contact: Anna Ghosh, Food & Water Watch: 415-293-9905, aghosh(at)fwwatch(dot)org.

Brussels – Food & Water Europe released a report today outlining why the genetically engineered (GE) salmon currently being considered by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for approval as a human food will not alleviate global hunger.

GE Salmon Will Not Feed the World outlines several reasons why this transgenic fish is likely to be more expensive to produce than perceived, as well as problematic for the environment, fishing communities and consumers. The report was released a day after Scottish MP Rob Gibson motioned to petition the Scottish Government to monitor the FDA’s approval process, noting that escapees are likely to occur through time and could easily reach the shores of Scotland, “altering forever the genetic integrity of wild Atlantic salmon and of quality Scottish farmed salmon.”

“The company producing this experimental fish, AquaBounty, is the only one who will be profiting from it, despite misleading claims that this product could be a means to feed growing populations around the world,” said Wenonah Hauter, Executive Director of Food & Water Europe.

Since GE salmon can require large amounts of food, display deformities and likely have higher oxygen demands, they can be costly to produce. These projected costs, combined with the various potential human health and ecological concerns associated with GE fish, will not likely add up to a more financially advantageous product for growers or consumers.

Furthermore, farmed salmon in general may not be as nutritious or safe as wild salmon. They contain on average 35 percent fewer omega-3 fatty acids – which are important for human health, but not produced by the body. Also, farmed salmon often contain higher levels of contaminants in their fat (which they can have more of than wild salmon), including 10 times the amount of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). GE salmon are also known to have higher levels of insulin-like growth factor 1, which has been associated with increased risk of certain types of cancer.

These worrying food safety issues are compounded by the environmental damage GE salmon would add to the already unsustainable salmon farming industry. The small, wild fish used in salmon feed are a major food source for marine mammals, birds and larger fish as well as low-income, food insecure populations around the world. In 2006, the aquaculture sector alone consumed nearly 90 percent of small prey fish captured worldwide. GE salmon may require about five times the amount of feed as a non-altered salmon to grow faster. This will further exacerbate the decline of available wild fish for marine wildlife and people in countries that need it most. If fish are not used in feed, it is entirely likely that the fish would be fed on industrial soya—which is associated with serious environmental and human rights impacts as well. Escapes of GE salmon into the wild could also threaten wild salmon, by competing for food, habitat and mates.

“GE salmon is an inefficient way to produce food that comes with more costs than benefits,” says Hauter. “We should be concerned about protecting consumers and our wild fish populations rather than pushing forward to approve this potentially dangerous product.”

Read the report.

Food & Water Europe is a program of Food & Water Watch, Inc., a non-profit consumer NGO based in Washington, D.C., working to ensure clean water and safe food in Europe and around the world. We challenge the corporate control and abuse of our food and water resources by empowering people to take action and transforming the public consciousness about what we eat and drink.

Contact: Eve Mitchell, +44 (0)7962 437 128 or +44 (0)1381 610 740, emitchell(at)fweurope.org
Gabriella Zanzanaini, +32 (0)488 409 662, gzanzanaini(at)fweurope.org