GM CROPS.. LATEST INFO AND QUESTIONS ANSWERED
An attempt to calm public concern over GM food has backfired on the Government. It came when Cabinet Enforcer Jack Cunningham admitted his plan for voluntary controls on the growing of modified crops could fail. The ministers bid to restore consumers' confidence took a second blow when leading supermarket chains said that nothing he had announced would persuade them to start stocking GM products.
After telling MPs that Government scientists had found no evidence that GM food was harmful to health, Dr Cunningham announced he was creating two new quangos to advise ministers on biotechnology. A new Agricultural and Environment Biotechnology Commission will cover the use of genetic modification in agriculture and its environmental effects. A new Human Genetics Commission will advise on the use of biotech advances in healthcare. Dr Cunningham said that a study of GM foods by the Chief Medical Officer, Professor Liam Donaldson and the Chief Scientific Officer, Sir Robert May, had found there was "no current evidence to suggest that the genetically modified technologies used to produce food are inherently harmful." He said he had agreed tough voluntary rules on planting GM crops which may form the basis for future legislation., but he also gave the go-ahead to field and farm-scale trials of GM crops and refused to rule out the prospect of the produce from the trials being sold to food producers.
Under pressure from Liberal Democrat environment spokesman Norman Baker, Dr Cunningham acknowledged his voluntary guidelines could fail. "No one can ever guarantee that a deal will never unravel, but there are strong provisions in this agreement. All our evidence is that the companies do want an agreement which will work in practice" he said. However, the strength of feeling among activists was underlined when a protest disrupted the annual meeting of AstraZeneca, a drug giant involved in developing GM crops. A handful of activists stormed the meeting at Londons' Royal Lancaster Hotel shouting abuse at the company's board and repeatedly bashing the microphone in front of AstraZeneca's chairman, Sir Sydney Lipworth. Michael Pragnell, chief executive of Zeneca Agrochemicals, the division researching GM products, said: "We do welcome the broadest of possible debates on these issues. There are some real questions that need to be taken seriously and answered" but he added: "You cant stop science dead in its tracks."
Earlier the protestors targeted the companys head office in Mayfair. They locked themselves into a meeting room and one person was arrested.
Back on the political front, Dr Cunningham admitted no decision had yet been made about whether GM companies would be allowed to sell crops from farm and field-scale trials. The Cabinet Office said a voluntary code agreed with the GM industry would ensure that producers engaging in field trials "undertake the best agricultural practice and provide all information necessary to ensure that GM crops are grown safely." Dr Cunningham cast doubt on an American study published in the journal Nature which showed that pollen from GM corn could be lethal to monarch butterflies. He said it was a laboratory experiment, not done in the creatures' natural habitat. "That doesn't mean it is invalid, but you have to observe things in their natural environment," he said.
Dr Arpad Pusztai first sparked off fears about the safety of GM foods by suggesting his experiments on rats showed GM potatoes could undermine the immune system, but a report by the Royal Society dismissed his research as "seriously flawed" and said no conclusions could be drawn from it. Charles Secrett, director of Friends of the Earth, said "The voluntary code of practice produced by the GM industry is feeble. Monitoring will be left to the industry. No attempt has been made to tackle the creeping commercial development of GM crops."
Initial reaction to Dr Cunninghams' announcements from retailers was also negative. Both Iceland and Safeway said they would not put GM food back on the shelves. Meanwhile, a testing kit which can show whether maize and soya crops have been genetically modified has arrived in Britain. Similar in principle to a pregnancy testing kit, it was invented in the US. Experts hope to widen their use to take in other crops.
THE VITAL QUESTIONS THAT NEED TO BE ANSWERED
WHAT ARE GM CROPS? They have been given a gene or genes from species with which they could not breed in nature. This gives them new properties, like resistance to pesticides or a longer shelf life. No GM crops are grown in the UK commercially, but they are in America. The Government has begun farm-scale trials.
WHY ARE THEY SO CONTROVERSIAL? Critics like Prince Charles say it is wrong to tamper with nature. There are fears about long-term effects on health and the environment. After BSE, E-coli and salmonella, consumers do not want to take risks with their food and do not trust politicians or industry scientists.
ARE THEY SAFE? Biotech firms insist they are tested rigorously. Critics say there is little published research into their dietary impact. The British Medical Association has called for an open-ended ban until we know their long-term consequences.
WHAT DID JACK CUNNINGHAM DO TO ENSURE THEY ARE SAFE FOR US AND THE ENVIRONMENT? He set up two committees to advise ministers on the risks, launched a voluntary code with the biotech industry and promised no "unrestricted commercial cultivation" until ministers were happy the crops would not harm the environment. He also published two reports which effectively said GM food is safe.
HAS HE DONE ENOUGH TO REASSURE A CONFUSED AND SCEPTICAL PUBLIC? No. He has done the bare minimum. He failed to introduce tough, legally-binding controls on a wealthy industry.
WHAT WAS WRONG WITH DR CUNNINGHAMS STATEMENT? Where there was confusion and uncertainty he has created more confusion and uncertainty. For instance: He says there will be no "unrestricted commercial cultivation of any crop" until "we are satisfied that it does not harm the environment." This could allow limited commercial production before safety is guaranteed. Pressure group Friends of the Earth says commercial planting is already taking place on four farms growing GM fodder maize, which has been given marketing consent. The code for monitoring GM crops was drawn up by the industry and is voluntary, so it relies on the goodwill of companies that stand to make a fortune from them. There is no extension of the labelling system which lets consumers choose whether they eat GM food, but the current system does not apply to derivatives, like soya oils or lecithin. There are no requirements for GM animal feed to be labelled or for livestock reared on it to be marked.
DID THE GOVERNMENT REPORTS GIVE GM FOODS A CLEAN BILL OF HEALTH? Not quite. It only said there is "no current evidence" that they are "inherently harmful." The Government should not be telling consumers there is no evidence that food is not safe - it should be required to prove that it is. Most concerns about safety concern the long-term effects. Saying there is "no current evidence" of problems is hardly likely to reassure us. The report also warns of the risk of causing new allergies and spreading resistance to medicinal antibiotics. It calls for more research, stressing that "nothing can be absolutely certain in a field of rapid scientific development."
WHY IS THE GOVERNMENT SO IN FAVOUR WHEN OPINION POLLS SHOW THE PUBLIC IS OPPOSED? No-one knows.
DAILY EXPRESS OPINION: Jack Cunningham failed the test. Setting up more advisory committees and launching a voluntary code on GM crops is simply not enough. It is not in the biotech industry's interests to observe a voluntary agreement which could cut its profits and, if the Government believes some sort of regulation is needed, it should make it legally binding. Nor did Dr Cunningham answer the accusation made by Friends of the Earth that the report he published, by the Chief Medical Officer and Chief Scientific Adviser, was tampered with.
The Government has lost the publics' confidence on GM foods and, on the evidence of yesterdays performance, Dr Cunningham is not going to win it back. The pattern of insisting GM products are safe while blaming the media for whipping up hysteria is familiar and lazy. It is also not working. When will the Government put somebody in charge of GM policy who we can trust to put public health before the profits of the biotechnology industry?
If you have any
comments regarding GM crops I will add them to this page 
24/03/01