More shafting in the name of profit

[Scuba_Steve]

My biggest problem with all of this is this: Why do we need all of these new laws? I'd be happier if the fuckers just got on and enforced the laws that we've had for decades, like not beating kids, not stealing other people's gear, driving while pissed etc. Instead these wanks all sit around debating on the rights and wrongs of my pensioner next door neighbour selling me a couple of cabbages, or whether or not there should be a law about how much water should be allowed out of your shower nozzle.

We need less government interference in our lives, not more.

Aside from that this bill is supposedly about "food safety" why don't they just address current concerns instead.
One that spring to mind is red colouring, if offers no nutritional advantage, can be replaced with another product, is potentially harmful, is banned at some level in Australia, Euro, & even US. Yet our "food safety" people refuse to ban it here.
Why won't they ban it you ask? "not enough research done about it", why don't they research it? "no money"
So they can't afford to research it so that never getting done, it's easily replaceable with a safe alternative, it offers nothing in the way of nutritional value it is simply a colour, it's potentially harmful & even our neighbour country whom we are supposed to "share" our food health with has banned it. So why is it not banned here??? "not enough research"... But hey this Bill will make food safe

[mashman]

Full quote here http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/f...monsanto200805

Great find... and we wonder why there are conspiracy theorists.

[Scuba_Steve]

Another thing this bill still stomps on is home-made jams, preservatives, honeys, pickles, relishes etc

[avgas]

Heh. Its funny how everyone is jumping up and down about Monsanto coming here where the likes of Fonterra, Fletchers, CHH, Orica/ICI......have been doing shit like this in NZ (with govt approval no less) for decades.

[mashman]

My biggest problem with all of this is this: Why do we need all of these new laws? I'd be happier if the fuckers just got on and enforced the laws that we've had for decades, like not beating kids, not stealing other people's gear, driving while pissed etc. Instead these wanks all sit around debating on the rights and wrongs of my pensioner next door neighbour selling me a couple of cabbages, or whether or not there should be a law about how much water should be allowed out of your shower nozzle.

We need less government interference in our lives, not more.

It's for your own good STFU.

I'd argue at this point in time that we need more government, just applied differently and looking after our interests and not the economic ones. The alternative is Big Agri, Big Pharma, Big Dave, Big Construction, Big Dave, Big Law! Oh the progress we've made. Tis all about the money honey.

[mashman]

It seems clear to me that this refers to seeds that are going to be eaten? So that would exclude seeds for planting.

If you plant a seed the becomes food, the surely that seed is a food producer, which would mean that it is subject to political harrassment.

[avgas]

Also those of who whom think Monsanto are 100% evil.....http://hbr.org/product/monsanto-and-...99M040-PDF-ENG
Turns out they make pretty good money on sustainable products, so much so its the companies focus. I mean think about it, if you doing something that will perpetually make you good money, why fuck it up?

Where as the NZ/Maori Fisheries have been caught doing the opposite.

But its SO EASY TO BLAME THE CORPORATES for the worlds problems isn't it?

[mashman]

Also those of who whom think Monsanto are 100% evil.....http://hbr.org/product/monsanto-and-...99M040-PDF-ENG
Turns out they make pretty good money on sustainable products, so much so its the companies focus. I mean think about it, if you doing something that will perpetually make you good money, why fuck it up?

Where as the NZ/Maori Fisheries have been caught doing the opposite.

But its SO EASY TO BLAME THE CORPORATES for the worlds problems isn't it?

S'ok if they're only 5% evil then?

[Winston001]

I have no time for conspiracy theories but I do subscribe to the well-intentioned cockup theory. It is very common. What seems like a good idea proves to be awful in practise. Some say the dog registration chipping law is an example.

On this occasion there are fair questions to be asked about the Food Safety Bill and we should do so.

Parliamentary draftsmen try to construct new laws in accordance with Select Committee instructions and those of the government. However they can't think of everything and MPs themselves have no drafting skills so clumsy mistakes do occur. That's why a Bill goes through three readings over months/years before the final version is agreed.

[mashman]

I have no time for conspiracy theories but I do subscribe to the well-intentioned cockup theory. It is very common. What seems like a good idea proves to be awful in practise. Some say the dog registration chipping law is an example.

On this occasion there are fair questions to be asked about the Food Safety Bill and we should do so.

Parliamentary draftsmen try to construct new laws in accordance with Select Committee instructions and those of the government. However they can't think of everything and MPs themselves have no drafting skills so clumsy mistakes do occur. That's why a Bill goes through three readings over months/years before the final version is agreed.

I know it's not THAT easy to put together. But most food comes from a seed. I woulda thought someone would have thought of that. Doesn't exactly fill me full of confidence that they missed that.

[davereid]

I know it's not THAT easy to put together. But most food comes from a seed. I woulda thought someone would have thought of that. Doesn't exactly fill me full of confidence that they missed that.

The Bill explicitly says it does not apply to cosmetics.

It would be merely an extra line to say it does not apply to seeds that will be planted not eaten.

Endless assurances that seeds will not be covered are meaningless unless they are included in the legislation.

The solution is blinding simple. Repeated failure to implement the solution is certainly ammunition for those who think the bill IS intended to cover seeds.

[mashman]

The Bill explicitly says it does not apply to cosmetics.

It would be merely an extra line to say it does not apply to seeds that will be planted not eaten.

Endless assurances that seeds will not be covered are meaningless unless they are included in the legislation.

The solution is blinding simple. Repeated failure to implement the solution is certainly ammunition for those who think the bill IS intended to cover seeds.

True. Does not apply to dormant seeds. Next

[Winston001]

Got a bag of sprouting potatoes here which I was thinking of throwing in the ground. So...are they food for eating or seeds?

[Pussy]

Got a bag of sprouting potatoes here which I was thinking of throwing in the ground. So...are they food for eating or seeds?

Make sure you plant them with Gladwrap around them. That way they won't get dirt in their eyes while they're rooting....

[Smifffy]

http://eatdrinkbetter.com/2011/05/11...s-in-basement/

In the Mission district of British Columbia, a controlled substances bylaw has led to fines for dozens of residents who were growing food and flowers.

Scary stuff.