UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 LJUBLJANA 000141

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

DEPT FOR EUR/NCE, EUR/ERA, EB/CBA, EB/TPP/ABT
DEPT PLEASE PASS TO USTR/ERRION
AMEMBASSY TALLINN FOR KELLY ADAMS-SMITH
AMEMBASSY VIENNA PLEASE PASS TO FAS
FAS PLEASE PASS TO OA/BEV SIMMONS AND ELIZABETH JONES
COMMERCE FOR ITA/SAVICH
TREASURY FOR VIMAL ATUKORALA

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: EAGR ECON ETRD SI
SUBJECT: SLOVENIA: VISIT OF MADELYN SPIRNAK HELPS MOVE
COEXISTENCE DEBATE FORWARD

REF: A. 05 LJUBLJANA 0106


B. 05 LJUBLJANA 0724

C. LJUBLJANA 0058


1. (U) SUMMARY: Senior Advisor for Biotechnology Madelyn
Spirnak's 22-23 February visit was a significant step in
moving forward Slovenia's ongoing ag-biotech coexistence
debate. Spirnak met with members of the Parliamentary
Agriculture Council, Senior Agriculture Ministry officials
and staff who are currently drafting coexistence legislation,
NGO representatives, senior executives from Slovenia's
largest poultry and corn producer, leaders of the Slovene
Farmer's Union, and biotech specialists from the University
of Ljubljana. During her visit, Spirnak was also interviewed
by one of the largest Slovene daily newspapers and a weekly
lifestyle magazine. The visit was an excellent opportunity
for Spirnak to see first hand the political challenges of
introducing biotech crops in Slovenia, but also to hear that
the government is taking a pragmatic approach to developing
its coexistence policies. Spirnak also heard that, as with
other EU member states, the level of understanding of GMOs
and the potential benefits they can bring are not well
understood by the average Slovene citizen. Post believes
that this visit contributed significantly to our overall
strategy of encouraging Slovenia to adopt a science-based
approach to coexistence and to enable a full range of choices
for the Slovene farmer and consumer. End Summary.

--------------
Slovenian Biotech Challenges
--------------


2. (U) Similar to other countries in the European Union,
there is a general perception in Slovenia that GMOs can have
harmful effects on the environment and those who consume
them. Nearly all contacts met during Spirnak's visit said
the public has an often visceral and uninformed reaction to
biased media reports designed to inflame fears. The most
significant roadblock to achieving a balanced policy on
coexistence and, certainly, on u

ltimately raising GMO crops,
is the strongly negative view held by the general public.


3. (U) As is typically the case with ag biotech in other
countries, the level of understanding in Slovenia about
potential risks and benefits is very low. Surveys performed
by the Slovenian Agricultural Institute have shown in the
past that a majority of Slovenes do not understand what
genetic characteristics are and believe that the food that
they consume does not contain genes at all. Fearmongering in
the press by the organic farming community and NGOs only
serve to further confuse the public. Nearly all of Spirnak's
counterparts during her visit noted that the most significant
challenge to ag biotech in Slovenia will be educating the
Slovene public. In addition, the director of the Slovene
Farmer's Union told Spirnak that farmers also need to be
educated about the real benefits that ag biotech can bring to
their businesses. He noted that while Slovene farmers know
that ag-biotech exists, there is an opportunity to reach out,
particularly to larger agribusinesses. (Note: In ref C, in
an effort to support this outreach, Post requested biotech
funds from EB/TPP/ABT to support publication and distribution
of Slovene language ag biotech educational materials. End
Note.)


4. (U) The relatively small size of Slovenian farms (on
average, 5-10 hectares) is another challenge to ag-biotech
and coexistence that was raised frequently during Spirnak's
visit. Many of Post's more skeptical contacts said they felt
coexistence of biotech crops along with conventional and
organic was simply not feasible with such small plots. In
Slovenia, only a handful of farms are larger than 100
hectares and most are less than 25. Opponents of
biotechnology also argued that any cost savings or efficiency
benefits from using ag biotech would accrue to such a small

LJUBLJANA 00000141 002 OF 003


percentage of the farming community that it would not be
worthwhile. (Note: Farmer's Union members told Spirnak,
however, that the large farms that do exist in Slovenia would
likely be interested in biotech solutions. End note.)

--------------
Preference For Organic
--------------


5. (U) Slovenia has joined an informal coalition with Austria
and Italy to grow only organic crops in certain areas of the
difficult terrain of the sub-Alpine region near the shared
borders of the three countries. Contacts at the Agriculture
Ministry and elsewhere have told Post that this agreement
bans growing of ag biotech crops in the region. We
understand that there is a long-term plan to increase organic
production in Slovenia from its current level of
approximately 3 percent of total farming to 10 percent.
Moreover, ag interlocutors tell us that Slovenia has
negotiated a rural development plan with the EU to support
"traditional" farming, including organic techniques. This
plan, which provides subsidies to farmers who follow all of
its rules and guidelines, prohibits the use of GMOs. The
program is widespread, with tens of thousands of Slovene
farmers (including the head of the Farmer's Union) taking
part. NGOs and other anti-biotech groups point to this and
allege that GMOs have no place in Slovenia.


6. (U) Major Slovene food producers, however, have told Post
that while consumers might express a theoretical preference
for organic grown crops, it is unlikely that the share of
organic consumption will grow significantly beyond its
current level due to the much higher cost of these products.
Moreover, the larger farms in Slovenia which would
potentially benefit from the introduction of biotech crops
are a significant distance from the "organic region."
--------------
The Pragmatic View
--------------


7. (U) In spite of the challenges of creating an effective
coexistence policy framework and introducing biotech crops,
high-level contacts at the Ministry of Agriculture say that
enabling choice and adopting EU legislation are the main
goals in the drafting of coexistence legislation. Franc But,
State Secretary (Deputy Minister) at the Ministry of
Agriculture, repeating a mantra he has said in both public
and private fora (refs A and B), told Spirnak that he was
committed to ensuring that EU rules on coexistence are
adopted and that this included ensuring farmers and consumers
have the free right to choose which kinds of food to grow and
consume. While But is ahead of the public opinion curve on
this matter, he is an important supporter of a science-based
approach to coexistence and understands the needs and demands
of the farming community as well as consumers.


8. (U) Most sensitive to the discussion of ag biotech are
Slovene food producers. As with the Agriculture Ministry,
large producers seem to be taking a pragmatic view of
biotechnology and recognize its advantages as well as its
inevitability. Nada Krajnc, Director of Marketing for
Perutnina Ptuj, Slovenia's largest poultry and corn producer
(and supplier of chicken nuggets to McDonald's), told Spirnak
that Perutnina will adopt ag biotech as a feed source "when
it makes business sense." Referring to the dramatic,
negative impact on sales in Slovenia of a recent, minor
incident of unintended presence of GMOs in feed used in
production of meat products in Croatia, Krajnc noted that it
would be necessary to introduce GMO products very carefully
and with a concerted effort to educate consumers by both
private business and the GOS. In addition, Krajnc also
pointed out that it would be critical for this educational
process to start in the near future as acquiring non-GM soya
feed for Perutnina chickens was becoming very difficult and

LJUBLJANA 00000141 003 OF 003


expensive. As an executive at a large agricultural concern,
Krajnc understands the financial benefits ag biotech can
bring and could prove to be a key advocate in encouraging a
balanced coexistence policy.

--------------
Process Going Forward
--------------


9. (U) Spirnak's visit helped Post to keep ag coexistence on
the front burner of the GOS's agenda. Ag State Secretary But
and others have said that efforts such as the October 2005
coexistence conference (ref B) and visits by senior USG
officials have helped to move policy discussion forward.
During Spirnak's visit we learned that the Agriculture
Ministry is "nearly finished" with a first draft of
coexistence legislation. Once this document is finished, it
will be sent through the interagency process where other key
contributors (in particular, the Ministries of Environment
and Health) will have an opportunity to suggest changes.
Post understands that at this point, there will also be
opportunity for public and interest group commentary. The
Agriculture Ministry tells us that it expects the legislation
to be sent to Parliament by the fall of 2006.

--------------
Comment
--------------


10. (U) Despite the challenges that face the future of ag
biotech in Slovenia, senior government officials and
businesspeople appear to be sticking to a pragmatic approach
to the technology. If the attitude of "GMOs are unavoidable,
we have to figure out a way to deal with them" is less than
an open-armed greeting, on balance, it seems more welcoming
than what we hear from Slovenia's Austrian, Croatian, and
Italian neighbors. Senior Slovene ag contacts tell us that
our coexistence conference in October 2005 (ref B) was a
critical step in kicking off the debate within Slovenia and
helped move the legislative process forward. Spirnak's visit
was another significant step in keeping the debate alive.
Her visit enabled us to discuss this matter with all of the
key players in the GOS and agriculture industry. While we do
not expect Slovenia to adopt GMOs without some serious and
contentious debate, Spirnak's visit was a key part of our
overall strategy to encourage Slovenia to develop a
science-based set of rules that allows farmers and consumers
to choose. End comment.


11. (U) Madelyn Spirnak has cleared this message.
ROBERTSON