Archived press release

Lords lose gmo plot

21 January 1999

But the report admits that the risk to the environment is “difficult to estimate” and that “harm to the environment by GM crops has yet to be demonstrated experimentally”(paragraph 74). It is therefore not clear how the Committee could judge the balance of risk against benefits. Friends of the Earth has called for a five year moratorium on the commercial growing of GM crops in the UK so that research into environmental and health risks can be completed and assessed. Environmental risks, accepted by the Committee,include

• gene transfer between micro-organisms, which could, for example, increase anti-biotic resistance in humans
• gene transfer between plants, creating weedkiller resistant weeds
• developing insect resistance to pesticide.

The Select Committee report contains serious errors of fact. For example it claims that:
“GM technology may offer much to organic systems, for example through reduced inputs”(paragraph 172). In fact, organic farmers are prohibited from using GMOs, pesticides,artificial fertilisers and animal growth promoters. It also suggests that “Antibiotic-resistant marker genes should be phased out as swiftly as possible” (paragraphs 114 and 184). In fact food containing crops with such genes is already on sale in Europe, imported from the USA. Many of the crops close to commercial licensing for growing in the EU also contain such genes.

The Select Committee report is intellectually confused. For example, it claims that “ethical questions should be addressed before regulation, not during or after” but then suggests that “the Market might be a suitable arbiter” (paragraph 127). It accepts that “for some people the use of GM products ...is an ethical issue” (paragraph 127 and 195) but supports

labelling only of a number of a limited number of GM derived products (paragraph 189) thus preventing consumers from exercising any ethical choice. The report recommends that “It would be advisable for the immediate future ...for segregation to occur to facilitate consumer choice” (paragraph 132) but also concedes that this could “result in GM free products being available at a premium price, similar to organic”. The 60% of consumers not wishing to eat GM food would pay more to satisfy the massive biotech companies. The report even suggests that untrained farmers should monitor GM crops for “the unusual and problematic“ (paragraph 103) and then suggests that this is some way equivalent to trained doctors “perceived adverse reactions in patients from pharmaceutical use”.

Friends of the Earth food campaigner Pete Riley commented:

“This is the wrong report, written at the wrong time, by the wrong people. A Committee set up to look at developments in the European Union was obviously unable to distinguish between scientific evidence and the propaganda of the biotech industry. What a shame that the report wasn't undertaken by better informed and more authoritative Lords Committee on Science and Technology.

We don't know enough about the environmental and health risks of GM crops to consider giving commercial licenses in the UK. We won't know enough for at least five years. That's why we - and the majority of the British public - want a moratorium on commercial licenses. Nothing in this bodged and muddled report in any way refutes this elementary application of the precautionary principle.”

If you're a journalist looking for press information please contact the Friends of the Earth media team on 020 7566 1649.

Published by Friends of the Earth Trust