Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Mon, 23 Jan 2012 14:45:55 +1100 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
On 21/01/2012 8:35 PM, Bil Harley wrote:
>It seems to me right and proper that Governments, like the EU, lay
down rules that define what organic honey is within their frontiers. The
alternative would lead to a >multitude of businesses selling
certifications which would become meaningless, confusing, and open to
corruption.
Which is the situation we now have. Presumably the reasons governments
are reluctant to be involved is around just what rules one imposes, some
of the rules seem to me to be close to idiotic. I.e. In Australia all
states require that all hives with AFB have the bees killed and the
equipment either burned or irradiated. The organic rule makers have
decreed that irradiation is not to be countenanced. There is no
plausible reason for this decision, in fact it goes against the idea of
sustainability. Plus by a government giving an imprimatur to a
particular system, it then says, 'this is the best', which is of course
debatable. Certainly it is the role of government to police health
issues, but not marketing ploys, except in so far as they are intended
to deceive. The EUs rules of course are no more than a non tariff barrier.
Geoff Manning
***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html
Guidelines for posting to BEE-L can be found at:
http://honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm
|
|
|