Greenpeace under fire at inquiry

The inquiry by the House of Representatives Standing Committee on the Environment into the register of environmental organisations was launched in March and is being chaired by NSW Liberal MP Alex Hawke.

Senator Canavan’s submission to the inquiry highlighted several examples of unlawful protest activities undertaken by some organisations on the register containing about 600 different groups.

He also raised concerns about the effectiveness of fines and arrests for such protest activities when “environmental groups make it known that fines will be paid through donations”.

In his submission, Senator Canavan said Greenpeace members scaled the 1.8-metre fences at a CSIRO facility in 2011 and destroyed a GM trial wheat crop with whipper snippers.

“Greenpeace used a video the activists made of the destruction for publicity purposes,” he said.

“Greenpeace was fined $280,000 and the two members given (suspended) jail sentences.”

Senator Canavan believes organisations that break the law should not remain on the register, despite claiming their work is in the public benefit and therefore eligible to receive tax deductions.

He said Greenpeace had “repeatedly and blatantly broken the law and often boasts about doing so”.

Despite the criticism, the CSIRO anti-GM protest wasn’t directly mentioned in Greenpeace Australia’s inquiry submission on its list of 23 achievements in the name of environmental activism.

However, the incident, which sparked outrage from the scientific community and farm sector at the time, was examined during a recent ABC Radio interview.

Greenpeace political advisor Jessica Panegyes said her organisation’s job was to protect the environment and the tens of thousands of Australians who regularly donate to Greenpeace every month support the range of tactics they employ to do that – including breaking the law where necessary – or taking peaceful direct action.

“Those two activists involved took full responsibility for their actions, they paid the fine, they took the suspended prison sentences that they were handed down,” she said.

“They took full responsibility for the fact that they had taken peaceful direct action to protect the environment.

“Some extreme members of the Coalition call for us and for the thousands of Australians who support us to lose their tax deductible donations to Greenpeace but at same time they’re quite happy to take tax deductible donations from big mining companies.”

Ms Panegyes said tens of thousands of Australian mums and dads donated to Greenpeace knowing “when strictly necessary” their environmental protection work involves peaceful direct action that may break the law.

“Environmental and social progress has often involved courageous individuals taking direct action when the laws were wrong,” she said.

“The Abbott government doesn’t like criticism and they are doing everything they can to shut down their critics.

“It’s a sign that Greenpeace is being effective in running campaigns to protect the environment that we’re under this politicised attack.”

In late 2012, the two Greenpeace anti-GM activists - Jessica Latona and Heather McCabe - were handed suspended sentences of nine months in the ACT Supreme Court by Justice Hilary Penfold.

In a statement released after their sentencing, Ms Latona and Ms McCabe said: “We did it because we’re deeply concerned about the future of our food … GM is not proven safe to eat. The only thing we are sure about is that it’s a major threat to our environment.”

The Office of Gene Technology Regulator-approved trials were developing high amylose wheat and examining another GM wheat strain which increases biomass and grain yield.

The crop destruction is understood to have stifled research progress by about a year, due to lost grain affecting the amount of seed collected for testing and the assessment of agronomic performance.

But Greenpeace Australia-Pacific head of programs Ben Pearson said in a radio interview that the conservation group would not rule out undertaking similar acts in future.

In a written statement Greenpeace promised to continue campaigning against the introduction of GM wheat technology into Australia.

“We will do this by working with farmers to ensure they get protection from the threat of contamination this technology poses to them and their crops, and thus their livelihoods,” the statement said.

At the time, then Australian Centre for Plant Functional Genomics (ACPFG) CEO Professor Peter Langridge said Greenpeace needed to discuss the associated issues at a scientific level.

Croplife Australia CEO Matthew Cossey said attempts to mislead the Australian public by the anti-GM campaign are “clearly starting to wear thin”.

“The public is smart enough to identify the blatant hypocrisy of a campaign which claims that there are risks posed by GM crops and then destroys the very research that seeks to identify and manage such risks,” he said.

“Unfortunately, these groups are very aware of the power of manufactured fear and will continue to prey on that for as long as it proves effective.

“There has not been a shred of credible evidence of any health issues associated with food derived from approved GM crops.”

Senator Canavan’s submission recommended the government conduct a formal audit of the register to assess the extent to which organisations on it are applying deductible gift funds to purposes outside of its objectives.

“Based on the available information, it appears that a substantial minority of organisations on the Register are applying deductible gift funds to purposes outside the explicit objects of the register,” he said.

“Greater transparency and increased availability of information would shed much needed light on the practices and characteristics of the various organisations currently endowed with tax deductibility status and ultimately on the environmental benefit the organisations on the register deliver.”

According to Senator Canavan, in 2014, Greenpeace Australia received $19.4 million in tax-deductible donations meaning around $6 million in reduced tax for donors “courtesy of all Australian taxpayers”.

Greenpeace Australia’s submission to the inquiry said since 1983 they had advocated for and won a number of policy changes from government and business, citing 23 samples, but not the destruction of CSIRO GM wheat trials.

The examples included a reduction in nuclear power generation and the Australian Government legislating to ban super trawlers from Australian waters.

“Our campaigns are situated in a global context, are based on sound evidence and are developed with wide consultation and input from a variety of internal and external parties including subject matter experts and supporters,” the submission said.

“Any attempt to restrict the DGR (deductible gift recipient) status of organisations that engage in advocacy work would be contrary to the Australian Constitution and to our democratic system of government,” it said.

Greenpeace issued a report ahead of the CSIRO protest titled, “Australia's wheat scandal: The biotech takeover of our daily bread” but were slammed for failing to properly consult with senior grains industry stakeholders and promoting misinformation to run a fear campaign against biotechnology approved by federal regulators.

“This report details why the Australian Government must intervene to stop the corporate attempt to commercialise GM wheat in Australia by 2015, beginning with a ban on all trials of GM wheat in the field,” Greenpeace said of the report.