Home > FOE Cymru > Press Releases > 2000: Assembly fail to hold public meeting on GM trial

Making life better for people by inspiring solutions to environmental problems

Ymddiheuriadau. Dim ond yn y Saesneg mae datganiadau i'r wasg Cyfeillion y Ddaear i'w cael. Am ragor o wybodaeth gweler ein Cynllun yr Iaith Gymraeg.

Assembly Inaction slammed by FOE Cymru

Friends of the Earth (FOE) Cymru has described the National Assembly's failure to hold a public meeting on the GM maize trial in Flintshire as a ‘slap in the face for democracy'. The Assembly made a firm commitment to hold a meeting before the end of July, which has been broken[1]. It now looks as though the local community will have to wait till September until a meeting is held. FOE Cymru has written to the Agriculture Secretary Carwyn Jones asking him to take urgent, personal action to ensure the meeting goes ahead without further delay (copy attached).

At a meeting with Agriculture Secretary Christine Gwyther and Assembly officials on the 28th of June, FOE and Assembly Members from all parties were promised that a public meeting in Sealand would be held before the end of July. The breach of this agreement makes a mockery of the Assembly's "repeated assurances" [2] on the GM issue.

As FOE Cymru believed the Assembly was acting too slowly, the group made progress organising its own meeting which would have been on the 24th of July. However the meeting was cancelled as DETR , the Agriculture Secretary and the constituency Assembly Member, Tom Middlehurst, refused to speak, on the grounds that they would be organising their own meeting.

Raoul Bhambral, GM Campaigner for FOE Cymru, commented:

" It's a slap in the face for democracy. Why make promises that you can't keep? Carwyn Jones must now take urgent action himself to fix a date for the meeting. He has been in the job long enough to take control over the situation but has so far failed to act. Leaving important matters like this to officials is not accepting enough personal responsibility.

" The local people must be given the opportunity to put their questions to their elected representative and senior civil servants who are responsible for this trial going ahead."

" The Government of Wales risks losing the last vestiges of its credibility over the handling of this issue if the meeting is delayed any further."

Notes

1 Meeting with cross party AMs, Ms. Gwyther and FOE on the 28th of June 2000. The meeting ended with a joint statement and 7 commitments.
2 Letter from the Agriculture Secretary's Private Secretary to FOE Cymru dated 14th July 2000.

TEXT OF LETTER TO CARWYN JONES AM FOLLOWS:

Carwyn Jones
Agriculture Secretary
National Assembly for Wales
Cardiff Bay CF99 1NA

15th August 2000

Dear Carwyn.

We are gravely concerned at the Assembly's continued failure to hold a public meeting in Sealand, Flintshire. Christine Gwyther promised to hold one by the end of July, in a meeting on the 28th of June, but now it looks like it will not go ahead till September.

This delay is clearly unacceptable as by this time the crop will almost certainly have flowered.

We urge you to take immediate action yourself to ensure the meeting goes ahead as soon as possible, as the Assembly has made "repeated assurances" that a meeting will be held.

We are also concerned at the lack of response to our letters seeking assurances that the Assembly can be sure that the above mentioned trial is lawful. Clearly, if the Assembly had good grounds to be sure of the trial's lawfulness it should not have taken this long for you to share this information with us.

We note in your letter to Jenny Randerson AM, dated 10th August, that "[you] do not have any information on the arrangements between the farmer and the biotech company.". We find this surprising to say the least. You will recall that Counsel's note, dated 15th June, stated that the Assembly needs to ensure that there is a valid answer to the question "... can it be demonstrated that the ‘arrangements' in this case comply in all respects with the description laid down in Regulation 32(1)? " If you take the view, as you do, that "the contractual arrangements are a matter for the two parties involved" then it does not seem to us that you will be addressing this question.

I hope very much that you can assure us, without further delay:

(1) that a public meeting in Flintshire will be held before the maize trial flowers; and

(2) that your officials will faithfully address the issues raised by Counsel over two months ago and not regard a key requirement for the purposes of establishing the legality of the trial as just a matter between two private persons.

I am also anticipating a reply to my letter of 2nd of August. I look forward to hearing from you soon.

Yours sincerely,

Raoul Bhambral
GM Campaigner