USDA Millennium Speaker Series Release No. 0117.99 Remarks As Prepared for Delivery by Secretary of Agriculture Dan Glickman USDA Millennium Speaker Series Washington, DC -- March 19, 1999 "Thank you very much, and welcome to our first installment in the Department's Millennium Speaker series. Thank you, Eileen, for those kind words. And thanks to our panelists for taking the time today to share their insights. "As all of you know, we are in the middle of a farm crisis. Falling commodity prices and shrinking incomes are putting the squeeze on farmers and ranchers around the country. Naturally, I spend a lot of my time and this Department devotes a lot of its resources to addressing and mitigating this crisis. "But even as we are caught up in the dealing with the immediate situation, it's critical that we not lose sight of the big picture. We can't let the dialogue on ag issues become all trees and no forest. Prices, I am confident, will rebound. The global economic recession will give way to recovery. The farm economy will bounce back. But then we will still have to answer vitally important questions about what agriculture will look like in the next century. That's why I launched this speaker series...so that we could examine broad issues and developments affecting the long-term future of American agriculture. "Our subject today is biotechnology, and you'd be hard-pressed to find an issue that has more far-reaching implications for agriculture in the new millennium. It presents both great challenges and enormous opportunities in just about every issue confronting this Department -- research, regulation, global competitiveness, conservation, concentration, and inspection. "Biotechnology is a powerful tool in ensuring global food security. The last fifty years are replete with stories of revolutionary innovations that increased productivity and helped fight hunger. The wheat gene Norin 10, for example, helped developing countries like India and Pakistan increase their wheat harvests by 60 percent. At the wheat research center in Mexico that conducted some of the Norin 10 research, there is an inscription on the wall that reads: "A single gene has saved 100 million lives." "Today, in a world of growing populations and shrinking farmland and forests, biotechnology becomes that much more important. We have more and more people to feed...more and more fiber to produce...and a limited amount of arable land to put into production. But biotechnology can allow us to generate higher yields, while putting less of a strain on our natural resources. "But some people, when hear the terms "biotechnology" and "genetic engineering" associated with things they put in their mouths, they get a little nervous. And all of us -- public policy leaders, the scientific community, and the private sector -- have an obligation to take their concerns seriously. "Sound science has demonstrated time and again that many biotechnological advances are safe and reliable. But if consumers at home and abroad don't share our confidence, they will reject genetically-treated products, and we won't be able to get a return on the enormous public and private investments we've made in biotechnology. "In Europe, there has been real reluctance to open their markets to our biotech corn varieties and other similarly-treated products, in part because their people are still reeling from the mad cow scare and other public health crises. We must continue to argue in multilateral forums like the WTO that our biotech products have withstood the strictest scientific scrutiny. But we also have to keep this in mind: market access isn't enough if, when it comes right down to it, many European consumers fundamentally don't trust and won't buy the products. "What we need is some kind of public information and consumer education effort domestically and internationally -- that will separate the myths from the realities and reassure people that our regulatory process is sound...that bioengineered food products are rigorously tested and deemed safe before being brought to market. "On the other hand, we also need to understand that biotechnology raises a number of policy issues that the agriculture community needs to consider. We must acknowledge that we are dealing with a new technology, and we must continue to demonstrate our vigilance about safety and public health. "To ensure that there is an open dialogue on all aspects of biotechnology, I'm announcing today the formation of an Advisory Committee on Biotechnology, which will examine the impact of biotechnology from every conceivable angle -- its creation, application, marketability, and so on. My goal is for everyone who has a stake in the future of biotech research scientists, social scientists, farmers, and consumers to be represented on the 25-member panel. "One of the things the advisory committee will explore is the impact of biotech on the small family farmer. In an increasingly top-heavy and concentrated farm economy, some worry that biotech might further tilt the playing field against the small operator. "The ownership issues are very tricky. There is a legitimate case to be made that farmers own the seeds they buy and are free to replant them as they choose. But those rights are at loggerheads with the legitimate proprietary interest of the company that pumped millions of dollars into the research that developed that seed. And while we respect their rights, I think we're all a little concerned when we read about agribusinesses filing law suits against small farmers, generating such an atmosphere of mistrust that small farmers are actually turning each other in. Somewhere, there's got to be some room for common ground. "We have to ask: Will the next generation of biotechnology products lead to greater contracting practices between companies and farmers? And should the government have a role in ensuring that farmers are treated fairly under those contracts? "What is the role of public research? Are we doing enough to promote public access to germplasm and maintain seed diversity? "Let's remember too that there are people who have other food preferences, and USDA must be responsive to them. Last year, we heard from 280,000 organic consumers who do not want any genetically modified organisms in their food. Are we at USDA doing enough to serve that market? As we discuss biotechnology issues, are we giving adequate consideration to biodiversity as well? "We're not going to answer all these questions today. But what we can do is have a frank dialogue, which will continue on our Advisory Committee and well into the new millennium. Working together, we can harness the potential of biotechnology to produce the greatest good for the greatest number of people. Thank you." "Now it's time to hear from the real experts. Let me kick off the discussion by posing a very general and open-ended question: What are the biggest challenges you see for the future in biotechnology? #