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? 

                               #