European Voice Conference 
                                           Release No. 0108.99 

Remarks
          As Prepared for Delivery
                               by
                                
         Deputy Secretary of Agriculture Rich Rominger
                   European Voice Conference
               Brussels, Belgium   March 18, 1999
                                
"Thank you very much ... and my appreciation, on behalf of the United States,
to The European Voice for sponsoring these proceedings, for giving us a forum
to talk and debate and keep open the channels of understanding. While we may
not have come with a consensus about new technologies, we have come with the
understanding that this is the moment for economic and trading relations
around the world  and that the paths we take on biotechnology will influence
                those relations, maybe forever.
                                
"Those of us with responsibility for moving international agriculture toward
that future would do well to pause and consider agriculture as one of our
deepest ties. For me, as a California farmer and former head of Food and
Agriculture for California   a state recognized for its environmental
leadership -- agriculture has always been a consuming interest. The family
farm is a link to my heritage, to my great-grandparents who came from the
            Black Forest to settle in California.  
                                
"From that rich soil and those foothills in California's great Central Valley,
my sons ask the same questions being asked by all of us about agriculture and
its responsibility to the future. Decisions they make ... decisions about
pesticides, wildlife habitat, preserving wetlands, sustainable farming
practices  are made by farmers the world over every day, and are profoundly
influenced by forums like this.  Agriculture gives them the opportunity to
help shape tomorrow's world, to produce enough for increasing populations and
preserve the resource base on which to do it IF their governments promote an
              efficient global trade environment.
                                
"We are all here today with an appreciation for the way agriculture links us
to the future, in ways more complex and profound than ever before.  I doubt
that there is one among us who is not struggling with the knowledge that the
way we handle those connections and the choices we make will affect  our
farmers  our economies  and our ability to feed more people and feed them
                  well. It's a great burden. 
"And we hope our approach  is broad and wise enough to protect the resources
of this planet we all call home so that it, in turn, can protect our children
                      and their children.
                                
"In the United States, we have learned to listen to the wisdom of Native
Americans. The Iroquois Indians teach that we're the keepers of seven
generations. Our actions today affect seven generations. Our grandchildren's
        children   what kind of world will they live in?
                                
"We are all asking the same questions. If we share a vision of a healthy, 21st
century community of nations built on a foundation of free and fair trade, the
issue is how to achieve it. It is the conviction of the United States that the
answers lie in open markets ... in expanding commerce that closes the gaps
between those who have and who have not ... and on the ability of governments
to adapt their policies to strong demand growth and the changing dynamics of
                      international trade.
                                
                     THE EU APPROVAL PROCESS
" Adaptability and responsiveness stand behind the economic reform embodied by
Agenda 2000. I want to note the leadership of Commissioner Franz Fischler and
the EU's executive body in incorporating greater flexibility in the internal
farm programs of the EU, an important step toward market orientation.
                                
 This sense of flexibility, innovation and the need for regulatory balance
must be brought to the controversial matter of agricultural biotechnology.  
                                
"We are extremely concerned about the status of the EU approval process for
biotech products. I will be candid. We have waited for the EU to exercise
leadership and deal systematically with the issues and opportunities posed by
modern biotechnology. We have witnessed two years of deliberations within the
Community to achieve consensus on approval and labeling policies. 
                                
"On the matter of the EU biotech approval process, to use an American phrase,
we are bending over backwards to understand your situation. We understand that
there is no Community-wide regulatory system that parallels the U.S. system.
The BSE outbreak in Europe seriously undermined public confidence in
scientific assurances and heightened anxieties about food safety. Anti-biotech
groups are active and vocal in several countries. Austria and Luxembourg still
maintain unilateral bans on biotech products that have been approved by the EU
                           Commission.
                                
"In the U.S., it takes an average of nine months for a biotech product to pass
through the regulatory process. In the EU, that time frame is 18-24 months for
approval to be granted, and the process is not open, transparent, or
predictable. As a result, European companies are discouraged from developing
varieties helpful to European farmers and consumers miss out on the benefits
                       of biotechnology. 
                                 
"While we welcome proposed changes that will lead to a more predictable
system, the U.S. is concerned about some of the proposals for revising the EU
approval process for biotech products. It's essential that revisions of
Directive 90/220 work toward a safe, open and transparent system with sound
                      science as its base.
"For the U.S., in the short term, the EU's lengthy, complex process costs us
money -- about $200 million last year in lost corn exports to Spain, Portugal
and other EU members. And since several U.S. biotech corn varieties remain
unapproved in the EU, it's entirely possible that we won't export any corn to
                       the EU this year.
                                
           BENEFITS OF BIOTECHNOLOGY IN THE LONG-TERM
"But our deeper concern is for the long-term, and the critical need to
establish a scientifically sound and open system. If there is any skepticism
about that need, consider the numbers and the people behind those numbers ...
75 million more mouths to feed each year. Experts say the global demand for
food will triple in the next 50 years. And much of that growth will take place
                  in the poorest countries.  
                                
"Add to that the fact that yields on the main grain crops   chiefly wheat and
rice -- may be leveling off. Scientists tell us that in the developing world,
80 percent of the recent growth in wheat production has come from increased
yields... only 20 percent from more planted acreage. More than half the
world's fertilizer use is in developing countries. India and China now
irrigate half the grain they grow, but new irrigation projects face barriers
of all kinds   technical, environmental, financial. And land is finite,
                      especially in Asia.
                                
"The fact is that we must feed another 1.5 billion people in the next two
decades without any more land. New research techniques and products, like
biotechnology, offer this promise. But technology is outpacing bureaucracy.
Technology's ability to innovate and develop new products is outrunning the
ability of government regulatory processes to assess these products and deal
with the political pressures surrounding them. The result is a dazed and
uninformed public. Not understanding the technology, and unable to look to
their governments, consumers in too many countries are unable to sort good
                     information from bad.
                                
"To the U.S., facts and numbers like these are a mandate, a global call for
responsible stewardship.  One of our greatest statesmen and humanitarians, the
late Vice President Hubert Humphrey, said that, "The oppressed people of the
world, the downtrodden and the helpless, do not aspire to a trip to the moon.
      They seek a safer and better journey through life."
                                
"That is something we have within our capacity to give. By bridging the gap
between the staggering population numbers and the constraint of limited land
and water resources, we have the potential to deliver the quantum leaps in
yields that the next half-century demands ...  the kind of progress that U.S.
 agricultural research made possible in the past half-century.
                                
"In 1942, someone brought a rotten cantaloupe into a USDA researcher in
Illinois, who was an expert on the nutrition of molds. Today, his portrait
hangs alongside Thomas Edison's and the Wright Brothers' in the Inventors Hall
of Fame. The name Dr. Edward Moyer may not be as familiar as Alexander
Fleming, who discovered penicillin. But it was Moyer who unlocked the mystery
of how to mass produce it -- giving the world a miracle cure for common
infections just in time to save many allied soldiers wounded on D-Day.
                                
" In 1945, a USDA agronomist who was part of General MacArthur's occupation
force in Japan spotted a hearty, short strain of wheat that he did not
recognize. He brought some seeds home, took them to a USDA lab inWashington
state. They did some more work, then sent their research and the seeds along
 to CIMMYT, the international wheat research center in Mexico. 
The eventual result? Norin 10, the gene that launched the green revolution,
enabling countries like India and Pakistan to increase their wheat harvests by
60%. At CIMMYT today, there's a shrine to Norin 10 with this inscription on
    the wall:  a single gene has saved 100 million lives.' 
No hospital in the world can make that same claim.  But now we must shed any
notion that traditional research techniques will stand by us in the next half
century. They won't   their returns are diminishing. Here on this continent
that gave us Dolly, the cloned sheep, we must remember that science must serve
             humanity, never the other way around.
                                
"As President Clinton has said, "If the last 50 years were the age of physics,
the next 50 will be the age of biology ... where once nations measured their
strength by the size of their armies and arsenals, in the world of the future
                  knowledge will matter most."
                                
           THE U.S. EXPERIENCE IN BIOTECH REGULATION
"And I can tell you that knowledge   brought directly to the people   has been
      the starting point for all biotechnology in the U.S.
                                
"American consumers are as deeply concerned about the safety of their food as
Europeans. So we made their needs, their demands, and their right to know
            central to the U.S. regulatory process.
                                
"More than a decade ago, when we began developing policy on agricultural
biotechnology, we recognized that consumer confidence in the integrity of the
regulatory system would be the final arbiter of public acceptance of biotech
                           products.
                                
"Without qualification, that system has been grounded in the most  demanding,
scrupulous science. In 1986, we defined the regulatory path for testing and
commercializing biotech products as they move from lab to field to
marketplace.  Decisions are based on rigor in analysis and sound scientific
principles. Three federal agencies   the Food and Drug Administration, U.S.
Department of Agriculture, and the Environmental Protection Agency   have
authority over the use of biotech products in the United States. No product
may be used without meeting strict government requirements. Our process is
open and inclusive. We hold public meetings with scientific advisory panels. 
We post information on products under review on a web site to keep people
                        fully informed. 
                                
"Existing U.S. laws on environmental impact, pesticide and chemical use, and
food safety provide the solid framework for testing biotech products ....
assessing their safety for people and animals and the environment.
                                
"As a result, transparency, consistency, and independence mark the U.S.
biotech regulatory system. And we have an educated public confident in its
government, in its regulatory processes, and in the products of biotechnology
      because they've watched it happen and participated. 
                                
"They understand that from the time Gregor Mendel started cross-pollinating
peas in the 1800s, virtually all food has been improved genetically by plant
                           breeders.
                                
"They understand the exciting environmental benefits that biotech products
have to offer. They increase crop yields, cutting back on the land needed to
   grow food. Insect-resistant plants mean fewer pesticides. 
                                
They offer biological protection against specific pests and diseases, meaning
less dependence on synthetic chemical pesticides and a boost in plant
tolerance for environmentally safer herbicides. As biotechnology improves
plant adaptability to harsh growing conditions -- such as drought, salinity,
and temperature extremes -- it holds out the promise of increasing production
         to meet the growing number of mouths to feed.
                                
"The American people understand these things, and they welcome advancement ...
like last month's announcement coming out of the University of Newcastle in
England and Dartmouth College in the U.S.  By isolating a gene controlling the
iron in plants, researchers may have taken that critical first step toward
solving one of the world's most serious nutritional problems   iron
deficiency. The World Health Organization estimates that 3.7 billion people
worldwide suffer from iron deficiency  a problem so grave it's called "the
hidden hunger." This is just a start toward helping farmers grow iron-rich
plants, but it's one more example of the extraordinary research taking place
               in laboratories around the world.
                                
"The American people welcome this kind of advance. They accept biotechnology
because unbiased, scientific information has addressed their legitimate
questions. To gauge public acceptance, just look at the numbers. Until a few
years ago, not a single genetically-engineered crop was planted for commercial
use. By 1998, in the U.S., about 40 percent of the soybeans planted, a quarter
of the corn crop and a third of the cotton crop, were products of
biotechnology. In the U.S., more than 30 transgenic crops have been approved.
                                
"But don't confuse acceptance with complacence. Americans are as skeptical
about change and as demanding about safety as Europeans. But once satisfied
that the science is sound, they recognize that not moving to the next plateau
of human achievement is a step backward. They recognize that focusing only on
risk and not on benefits, with the urgency of 21st century needs pressing upon
              us, is the riskiest business of all.
                                
"About moving forward, a salute to the leadership of Belgium. The Belgian
biotech industry of over 50 companies invests more than 8.5 billion francs
             each year in research and development.
                                
                       BIOSAFETY PROTOCOL
"One of the thorniest issues in the biotech debate is the impact of living
modified organisms on biodiversity. Since the Swedish botanist Linnaeus
published his system for classifying living things in the mid-1700s,
taxonomists have identified between 1.5 million and 1.75 million species ...
         with many more yet to be named and described. 
                                
"On behalf of that biodiversity, more than 130 nations were represented last
month at negotiations on a Biosafety Protocol in Cartagena, Columbia. Their
goal was to finalize a protocol to the Convention on Biological Diversity. 
After 10 days of discussion on extremely complex matters, delegates failed to
reach consensus on key issues and the negotiations were suspended.
                                
"We feel the discussions served a purpose by clarifying major points and
narrowing differences. Our goal is a protocol that will protect biological
diversity and the environment without encumbering the trade of biotech
products with unnecessary restrictions, and we feel this is still possible. We
should focus on those biotech products posing the greatest risk to biological
diversity We must help developing countries make informed decisions, and
encourage nations to keep an open dialogue on introducing living modified
organisms into the environment. And we must achieve a protocol that fosters
          continued, vital research in biotechnology.
                              .  
"We have so much yet to learn about the earth's fragile web.  As the National
Geographic pointed out last month, "Life, we now know, flourishes from the
canopies of the tropical forests to the deserts of Australia to the hot
volcanic cracks in the bottom of the seas. This great diversity sustains human
life, maintaining the most fundamental resources   air and water. It also
gives the opportunity to make wonderful, life-changing discoveries.  For
instance ... a microbe harvested from Yellowstone's hot springs has provided
the perfect enzyme for mass-producing DNA, leading to today's boom in genetic
research. A wild species of maize promises to reinvigorate corn crops. The
natural world thus stretches before scientists  like the uncharted seas of
old, and researchers puzzle over what they know and don't know like sailors
                stepping ashore on a new land." 
                                
                           CONCLUSION
"What we do know is that millions already benefit from genetically modified
products.  As we move into the next century, we must push forward the
frontiers of science and knowledge  for medicines and vaccines, an abundant
food supply, an environmentally friendly agriculture. The ability of the
world's producers to feed growing populations hinges on the ability of
governments to foster an efficient global trade environment. As we go into
this year's WTO talks, with the goal of a free and fair world trading system,
we owe this to agriculture. And as traditional trade barriers begin to fall,
we owe it to consumers to see that food safety does not become the next trade
battleground. Science is doing its job. Producers are doing theirs. It is time
now for governments to do their part for a sustainable future.  A balanced
regulatory environment calls for science-based resolutions to biotech
differences,  educated consumers, and the embrace of what has been proven as
       progress and the next step in human achievement. 
                                
                        Thank you".