Inner City Press -- Investigative Reporting From the Inner City to Wall Street to the United Nations

UN's Partners on Food Pricing Range from Monsanto to Microsoft, Some Are Heartfelt

Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at the UN: News Analysis

UNITED NATIONS, September 24, updated Sept 25 -- The responses to the food crisis seen at the UN this week range from well-intentioned to intentionally deceptive. On September 24, flanked by Microsoft's Bill Gates, the World Food Program's director Josette Sheeran described her agency's efforts to buy food locally in the developing world. The hour-long session, billed as a press conference, left virtually no time for questions. Afterwards, in a small side room that did not include Bill Gates, Inner City Press asked Ms. Sheeran what she thinks of Myanmar ordering WFP not to buy rice in the country, but only to import it. She responded that sometimes they buy it in-country. But leaked memos from the UN's team in Yangon show clearly that the government ordered local purchasing to stop, so that rice can be exported for profit while donated rice keeps coming in.

   Ms. Sheeran also called inaccurate the press reports which quote WFP's Uganda country director Stanlake Samkange that the agency is cutting back on its programs. Uganda's president Yoweri Museveni, meanwhile, said during the session that he likes the food crisis, and that subsistence farming of homesteads in Uganda must be "wiped out."  He said, "the high food prices are very good for us." Video here, from Minute 32. He asked Bill Gates to help him with this.

  Howard Buffett acknowledged that the press conference should have left more time for questions. He provided an example from Nicaragua, of providing funding so that agricultural products don't have be driven far away for processing and then returned.

   Upstairs, over a lunch which reporters observer from a seating area on the side -- "there will be no opportunity to interact," they were told -- corporations and UN officials brainstormed about the food pricing crisis. Afterwards there was a brief Q&A session. Inner City Press asked about the nexus, if any, between food pricing solutions and attendees such as the oil company Total, the accountants of KPMG, Coca-Cola, chemical companies Dupont and Montanto, famous for patenting "terminator seeds" which do not reproduce, and which farmers have to
re-purchase year after year.

Update of September 25, 2008 -- The following was received from Monsanto, specifically from Brad Mitchell of Monsanto Public Affairs

re UN's Partners on Food Pricing Range from Monsanto to Microsoft, Some Are Heartfelt

One point deserves clarification. You describe Monsanto as the company 'famous for patenting terminator seeds which do not reproduce, and which farmers have to re-purchase year after year. We have never commercialized 'terminator seeds.' We've posted our position on this topic at http://monsanto.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=59&item=136 .

Also, you should be aware that many companies patent seed and plant materials, not just biotech seed companies. Without this sort of protection there is no way to recoup investments in producing better seed, and there would be no incentive to produce new seeds. Farmers and consumers would suffer. Here is an example of a non-biotech, patented plant variety. There are many other examples.

http://noursefarms.com/catalog/Product/Raspberries/RS-ANBR/Anne++.aspx

I would encourage you to visit our website and learn more about our efforts in Africa, particularly in Malawi, where we worked to get improved seeds to farmers. The results speak for themselves.

  Inner City Press asked for clarification, asking Monsanto to

"deny or confirm) reports that Monsanto's acquisition of Delta and Pine Land Company was challenged to the U.S. Justice Department because it  allegedly would "threaten farmers in developing countries by giving Monsanto  control of DPL's 'Terminator' technology. Terminator plants produce sterile seeds that cannot be saved and replanted, forcing farmers to buy fresh seed every year." See, Chemical Food News, February 26, 2007.

  The Georgetown International Environmental Law Review (Summer 2007) notes a full-page advertisement that Monsanto took out in Farm Journal stating that

'It takes millions of dollars and years of research to develop the biotech crops that deliver superior value to growers. And future investment in biotech research depends on companies' ability to share in the added value created by these crops. Consider what happens if growers save and replant patented seed. First, there is less incentive for all companies to invest in future technology, such as me development of seeds with traits that produce higher-yielding, higher-value and drought-tolerant crops.'"

  Two responses ensued:

I will have to check with the legal folks on the details of the challenge, but as noted, we have had a long-standing commitment not to commercialize sterile seed technology in crops. This was made prior to the 2007.

This is not to say that we do not take steps to protect our intellectual property. This is a necessity for any business. We just do it through mechanisms other than sterile seed technology. Please see our statements on these topics on www.monsanto.com/fortherecord

 And then

  The DOJ challenge to the merger had nothing to do with sterile seed technology.  You can confirm that by reviewing DOJ's complaint, the proposed final judgment, the competitive impact statement, and DOJ's response to public comments.  They can all be found on the portion of the Antitrust Division's website covering filings in the case (http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/monsanto.htm).  The extent of and basis for DOJ's challenge is spelled out in those documents.  As you will see, the DOJ challenge did not address sterile seed technology in any way, either by prohibiting or encouraging its use. I hope this addressed your question.

  It is what it is. The question was whether Monsanto's acquisition of Delta and Pine Land Company was challenged TO (not by) the U.S. Justice Department because it  allegedly would "threaten farmers in developing countries by giving Monsanto  control of DPL's 'Terminator' technology." We will have more on this, but never let it be said the company is not allow to pitch its line.

UN on food, Bill Gates on the left, military but not Microsoft reception shown

   The answer involved transportation and finance, but did not address what these companies are doing. A UN Assistant Secretary General who feels a need for anonymity, even at his level, tells Inner City Press he asked the corporations of the Global Compact these same questions, and was not convinced by the answers. But still the UN soldiers on, as if every corporate connection is a good connection.

   Two of the companies which, unlike Montanto and DuPont, stayed to answer questions were Iowa-based ethanol concern Poet LLC -- its Midwest facility is said to be "spotless" -- and the Sri Lanka tea conglomerate Hayleys, whose CEO N.G. Wickremeratne told Inner City Press that his country is misunderstood by the UN. "Eighty to ninety percent of the Tamils live in the south, did you know that?" he asked. When he spoke at the beginning of the session, Ban Ki-moon had just left, which he lamented. And so the misunderstandings grow.

  The day ended with a "Microsoft Heads of State Reception" behind security guards ina private room to the side of the UN's Delegates' Dining Room.  Inner City Press asked one of the entrants, "Why Microsoft?"

  "Bill Gates," was the answer. As always, and more at the UN than most other places, follow the money.

Watch this site, and this Sept. 18 (UN) debate.

* * *

These reports are usually also available through Google News and on Lexis-Nexis.

Click here for a Reuters AlertNet piece by this correspondent about Uganda's Lord's Resistance Army. Click here for an earlier Reuters AlertNet piece about the Somali National Reconciliation Congress, and the UN's $200,000 contribution from an undefined trust fund.  Video Analysis here

Feedback: Editorial [at] innercitypress.com

Search innercitypress.com  Search WWW (censored?)

Other, earlier Inner City Press are listed here, and some are available in the ProQuest service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.

            Copyright 2006-08 Inner City Press, Inc. To request reprint or other permission, e-contact Editorial [at] innercitypress.com -