Endosulfan Contaminates a Ministers mind

Click Here to Add Comment

Previous Current Articles Next

        Subject:   What is not done for love is done for money - no matter what the price.......
            Date:     Tue, 9 Jul 2002 
           From:      Stephen Tvedten <steve@getipm.com>
Organization:     Get Set Inc. (www.getipm.com)

To:     Paul Helliker <phelliker@cdpr.ca.gov>
          Director, State of California, Department of Pesticide Regulation 

cc:    Christine Whitman whitman.christine@epa.gov

Endosulfan Contaminates a Ministers mind by Sridhar R Agriculture.

Minister lies in the Assembly On 4th July 2002, the Kerala Assembly saw one of its most respected and old members - the Minister of Agriculture, Ms Gowri Amma sputter out lies in reply to an urgent motion brought in by the Leader of the Opposition, Sri. V S Achuthanandhan, against the lifting of the ban on Endosulfan.

The Agriculture Minister claimed that none of the studies have proven that endosulfan is the cause for the diseases in these villages. She then said that the State does not have the authority to ban Endosulfan, and that she has already prohibited the use of Endosulfan in PCK's cashew plantations.

But all the records and documents clearly show that the Agriculture Minister of the State was desperately lying.

The controversy over the use of endosulfan in the cashew plantations of Kasaragod, took a turn with this development, as it became more and more clear that the Government was playing into the hands of some vested interests, that was wrecking havoc not only on the health of villages in Kasaragod, but also the prospects of cashew in the State. Earlier in 2001,when the villages in Kasaragod were terrified by the realization that they were being poisoned by the pesticide Endosulfan for the last two and half decades the then Government instituted a committee under the chairmanship of Dr. Achuthan to study the issue. But as the threat of further spraying was there and as public opinion was being formed against the use of endosulfan, the Government prohibited its use in the State on 25th of August 2001, vide Order No. 1422/2002/AD of the Agricultural Department. The Order stated that "the usage of the insecticide Endosulfan in crops /plantations in Kerala is suspended until further orders". The Minister has now stated in the assembly that the Government had ordered the ban for only two months which was later extended by a month. This is not true. The prohibition was not restricted to any time period.

In fact, the ban continued till 18th of February 2002 ( 6 months , and not three months as the Minister claims). On 18/2/2002 the Government issued the now controversial order (G.O(Ms) No. 30/2002/AD from Secretary, Agriculture (PU) Department) lifting the ban on Endosulfan. Serious doubts were cast on this order, as it came during the state government employee's strike and in all probability did not have the nod of the Council of Ministers. The Minister claimed that the order lifting the ban was after considering the Section 27 of the Insecticides Act, 1968. She also claimed that as per Section 27, the State Government couldn't extend the ban for more than 3 months.

While this is true, the Act does not stop a Government, intent on protecting the health of the people from pollutants, to issue a fresh order after the three months. She had enough reasons to do so. Besides, the Government Order was not issued on the basis of the Insecticides Act as is being made to believe now.

Now, is it not stupid to say that a public health issue can only be dealt within the purview of the Insecticides Act, when there is the larger constitutional obligation (enshrined by the Article 21), the various Rules under the EPA Act etc based on which the Government can act.

Now, this Government Order is the single most damning evidence of the conspiracy that was in all probability hatched within the Agriculture Ministry. The Order claims that it has taken to consideration the recommendations of the Dr. Achuthan Committee Report and the Central Governments reports on the use of endosulfan.

Sources within the Ministry have revealed that this Government Order was drafted by the Agricultural Secretary, with the help of the Ministers Private Staff, consisting of even an administrative officer (on deputation) of the accused Plantation Corporation of Kerala. Though the order is based on the Dr. Achuthan's Report, it has been twisted, dropped phrases and even full statements to distort his recommendations. One can see that this order is a bureaucratic masterpiece crafted insidiously to protect Endosulfan and their manufacturers.

How was the recommendations of the Dr. Achuthan Committee distorted ? What was subverted ? And finally why did Gowri Amma lie ?

For this let's first compare the recommendations of Dr. Achuthan committee and the Government order, which ensued it. The difference is stark and speaks for itself. Some of them have been commented upon just to make the point clear.

Evidence 1 Dr. Achuthan Committee says Recommendation 1 - "Ban aerial spraying of pesticides in all the cashew plantations of PCK Ltd. in Kasaragod District".  The Government Order says Order (a) - "Aerial spraying of the Endosulfan will continue to be prohibited for all crops in Kerala considering the difficulties in adhering to conditions for safe aerial application of the insecticide in Kerala terrain"

What does this mean ?

The Government order banning aerial spraying of Endosulfan all over the state is actually eyewash. Aerial spraying of Endosulfan was undertaken only in the PCK plantations of Kasaragod, that too illegally since 1993. Moreover since 1993PCK has been conducting aerial spraying of Endosulfan, without the mandatory permission from the Central Government. While Dr. Achuthan had recommended banning of aerial spraying of (all) pesticides in PCK in Kasaragod, the Government Order restricts the ban of aerial spraying only to endosulfan. This means aerial spraying of any other pesticides can be continued anywhere in the State including the PCK plantations in Kasaragod.

Evidence 2     Dr. Achuthan Committee says Recommendation 2 - "Use of Endosulfan in the PCK plantations of Kasaragod should be frozen for 5 years".

Comment     The Government Order has not accepted this recommendation.

But the Agriculture Minister had stated in the assembly that PCK has been asked not to spray endosulfan for five years.

This was clearly a lie.

Moreover, implementing this would have affected the interests of the Endosulfan manufacturers. This is the first of the evidence which shows that the Agriculture Ministry had an ill-motive, otherwise why should they leave out such an important recommendation.

Evidence 3     Dr. Achuthan Committee says Recommendation 3 - "In the Cashew plantations in the Perla Division ( whichincludes Enmakaje Panchayath ), a total pesticide holiday should be observed for five years. The plantation should beleft to nature during these five years. Detailed study on tea-mosquito bug menace and its relationship to the crop productivity should be made during this period"

The Government Order says Order b) "Perla Division of PCK ( covering Perla and Muliyar villages Kasaragod District ) will observe a pesticide holiday for a period of five years."

Order e) "A small Cashew Unit will be set up by the KAU in the PCK plantation at Perla utilizing the infrastructure available with PCK. The mandate of the Unit would be to evolve appropriate plant protection strategies, assess the impact of application or non-application of pesticide and identify appropriate cashew varieties and technologies in the region."

What does this mean ?

The recommendation of Dr. Achuthan Committee has not at all been translated into its proper and meaningful research substance. Dr. Achuthan's recommendations that the plantation should be left to nature and the pest infestation and productivity studied have been totally subverted. This could have been a very important research in cashew plant protection for producing organic cashew, but the Agriculture Ministry has purposefully undermined this for protecting the interest of the chemical pesticide manufacturers.

Moreover, this order is contradictory in itself and also aims to undermine the purpose of the earlier order (b). How can an area have pesticide holiday and at the same time have a "cashew unit. to assess the impact of application. of pesticide...".It means that the Agriculture Ministry wants any program which can study the natural or organic methods of cashew farming subverted right from the beginning.

And quite interestingly, the Muliyar village was also included for a pesticide holiday in the Government Order so that Sri. Cherkulam Abdullah, Minister for Local Administration, who hails from Muliyar, and who had taken a lot of interest and pains in this issue would not be offended. This was a very partisan, politically safe move by the agriculture ministry.

Evidence 4     Dr. Achuthan Committee says Recommendation 4 - "In the other plantations of PCK in Kasaragod district, need based ground spraying (manual or power-oriented) of pesticides other than Endosulfan may be resorted to, in consultation with research organizations."

The Government Order says Order (c) - "PCK will undertake only ground based spraying of pesticides in their cashew plantations after following due safeguards for prevention of contamination of water bodies in accordance with the package of practices recommended by the KAU"

What does this mean ?

This is the most important piece of evidence, which shows that the Agriculture Ministry has been involved in a conspiracy to protect the interest of the Endosulfan manufacturers. In the Government order, the Agriculture Secretary, while drafting the Order has very shrewdly left out "need based" from Dr. Achuthan Committee's recommendation. The Secretary has also tactfully avoided the phrase "other than Endosulfan" and instead just said "pesticides". In this way, he made sure that Endosulfan can still be used in the PCK plantations. He also made sure that ground spraying should be done, without even looking at whether there is a need for it, as is the scientific practice. This would also ensure chemical pesticide use, even if unnecessary, as has been the practice for the last 25 years.

The Secretary has also brought in the condition of "following safeguards for prevention of contamination of water bodies" while spraying is undertaken. It should be understood that all the committees, which studied the issue, has concluded that it is not possible to take these precautionary measures in Kasaragod.

While the National Research Center for Cashew (NRRC) has already stopped recommending Endosulfan and has issued instructions to all the Cashew Stations in India, the KAU's package of practices still recommends Endosulfan. So, while Dr. Achuthan recommends that the pesticide use should be decided on consultation with research organizations, the Secretary has recommended the KAU itself, who are co-accused and have been responsible for the perpetuation of this chemical in the State.

Evidence 5     Dr. Achuthan Committee says Recommendation 6 - "Research efforts to evolve Integrated Pest Management(IPM) should be augmented".

Comments     The Government Order completely leaves IPM out, as IPM is a strategy which enables farmers to move away from chemical use and hence is ultimately detrimental to the interest of the Chemical pesticide manufacturers, whom the Agriculture Ministry wants to protect.

Evidence 6     Dr. Achuthan Committee says Recommendation 8 - "Since the cause of the human health problem could not be deduced conclusively, a detailed investigation involving scientists from all related fields should be conducted to identify the risk factors for the high morbidity in the Padre village and other affected areas. A detailed health survey should be conducted in the Padre village and other areas from which cases of abnormal health problems are reported. The health survey should cover the plantation workers also."

Recommendation 9 - "Since most of the people who complain about health problems are from the poorer sections of the community, the Government should make arrangements to provide special medical care to these persons."

Comments     The Government Order has tactfully left out ordering anything regarding these two recommendations as both would invariable point to accepting that there is a health problem. There is also the problem as to who should pay the compensation - the Government, the PCK or the Endosulfan manufacturers. The Government clearly wanted to skirt these issues, even at the cost of the poor people who are suffering and whose lives need to be looked after and compensated.

Evidence 7     And finally as in the Government Order (f) "the prohibition on the use of Endosulfan for all crops and plantations in Kerala" was withdrawn. There was no recommendation from any of the Committees to this effect.

"Expert Committees" of the Central Government The Government Order also says that they have "taken into account the recommendations of the various expert committees set up by the Government of India to examine the issues relating to the use of Endosulfan as an insecticide". There are two such committees - the Dr. Banerjee Committee which gave its recommendations in 1991 and then the Dr. R B Singh Committee which gave its recommendations in 1999. Both these committees recommended to the Registration Committee that:

the registration committee should not allow the use of endosulfan near rivers, lakes, sea and ponds, which are expected to be polluted. The committee also recommended putting this in the certificate of registration as a condition and a warning on the labels and leaflets in the containers.

Labeling should be made mandatory in bold letters to avoid use of endosulfan near water sources

It may be sold only in larger packs of not less than 1 litre.

Though these recommendations itself has wide reaching consequences and would have restricted the use of the chemical in India, the Registration Committee of the Central Insecticides Board never implemented any of them, even after a decade. It was later learnt that the Dr. Banerjee Committee which studied the use of Endosulfan constituted a task force which was manned by Experts from the Endosulfan producing companies. Mr Sundaresan, ex-Director of the Agriculture Department, who convened the Dr. Achuthan Committee, once revealed to this reporter that "You may be able to ban aerial spraying, but take it from me, you will not be able to touch endosulfan". Naturally, the clout of the manufacturers is much better known to the Officers in the Government.

Furthermore, regarding this latest Government Order, our enquiries with the senior officers of Agriculture Department revealed that none of the officers were involved in the drafting of it. These officers, who requested anonymity, appealed in one voice not to blame them for this government decision. "In fact, neither the ban order nor the earlier order lifting the ban was drafted in the Department, they all come from the Minister's office" said a Senior-ranked officer in the Department. "But the Government Order is only the implementation of the Achuthan Committee's recommendations" he added. When we told him that it was not true and showed him how the Government had tampered with the recommendations, the Officer looked noticeably shocked. "I did not notice this, the Department is ignorant of this" he said.

Did the Minister not see the ICMR Report ?

The State Government appointed Dr. Achuthan Committee had recommended that detailed health studies need to be done by an inter-disciplinary team to conclusively ascertain that Endosulfan is the cause for the health problems. The State Government had not appointed any such committee, instead just lifted the ban and put an end to the issue. Earlier last year, the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) had taken a suo-moto case based on a media report and asked the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) to study the issue and file a report. This exhaustive study done by National Institute of Occupational Health (NIOH) and led by the Director Dr. H.N Saiyed himself has submitted a report to the Central and State Governments in December 2001 itself. What has the ICMR report concluded ?

In each of these conclusion that the ICMR has arrived at they have stated that these health problems were caused byendosulfan.

Based on these conclusions, they have recommended the following

Now the question arises - How could the Government of Kerala lift the ban on the endosulfan use, even after such clear evidence of its detrimental effects on human beings was available on their tables? How could the Minister ignore such aclear evidence of the cause of the health problems?

The Agriculture Minister has shamelessly stated in Assembly that "there is evidence that the health problems may be due to marriage between blood relations (consanguinity ) and other traditional practices". She stated that a health departmentcommittee has been constituted to study this.

It is only adding insult to injury.

For the past twenty-six years and concertedly since December 2001, the Agriculture Ministry has been promoting the use of endosulfan and protecting the interest of this industry. Last Thursday, when finally the Kerala Assembly took up this issue the Speaker joined in support of the motion and demanded that the Agriculture Minister, Ms Gowri Amma issue an order stopping PCK from spraying Endosulfan. She half-heartedly conceded, clearly taken aback by the Speaker's intervention and the stoic silence from her own ministerial colleagues.

Now, there is clear evidence that the people in the Endosulfan-sprayed villages of Kasaragod are suffering from diseases and conditions unheard of, children with congenital birth defects, generations which were whimpering to death, due to poison, ignorance and finally insult.

And on the other side, we have a Government publicly lying that endosulfan has nothing to do with the tragedy. Well, Ms. Minister, what is it that makes you lie ? Why is the government so adamant that it will not ban endosulfan ? Have you all been bought by the Pesticide manufacturers ? and forced to tell lies ? So many lives are being wasted, the future of children is at stake, men and women have spent all their lives fighting diseases, spent hundreds of thousands of rupees on medicines, treatment and fighting to stop this chemical use. So much of evidence (scientific evidence, not "populism" - public opinion, which your Secretary hates) is already there and all it needs is the Government's support, so do tell us, Ms.Minister, what would it take to buy you back ?

Sridhar R Freelance Writer, "Sreevilas", Sreevilas Lane, Kowdiar, Thiruvananthapuram.

Email : toxicreporter@yahoo.com

Well Mr. Helliker,  Apparently the "corporations" run the governments/world and not the people. William Pitt in a Speech to the House of Commons noted: "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." Samuel Langhorne Clemens once noted: "All Congresses and Parliaments have a kindly feeling for idiots, and a compassion for them, on account of personal experience and heredity." James Madison (future US President), in a Speech in the Virginia State Convention of 1829-1830 noted: "The essence of Government is power; and power, lodged as it must be in human hands, will ever be liable to abuse." It is time for the people to peacefully take back the control of their own destinies and THEIR own governments! I am planning to go to India and lecture.  In the meantime, I have posted a free pest control book on the web that uses safe and far more effective alternatives, it is entitled: THE BUG STOPS HERE.  You can download it for free at: http://www.thebestcontrol.com .

Respectfully,  Stephen L. Tvedten

If you would like to be included in our mailing list for continuing information on pesticides, please email us at list@safe2use.com.

TOP


Nontoxic Products Recommended by Steve Tvedten

Now Available
Safe 2 Use Products and Services