Genetically Modified Crops (Hansard, 9 February 2004)

§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Lord Whitty)
My Lords, the Advisory Committee on Releases to the Environment advised on the implications of the farm-scale evaluation results last month. We are now considering this advice in consultation with the devolved administrations and will set out our conclusions shortly.

§ Lord Taverne
My Lords, will the Government take into account not only the advice of the committee, but also the profound concern about the future of plant biology in this country which was expressed in a letter to the Prime Minister from 114 leading scientists and supported by 150 international scientists?
Will the Government also take note of the fact that the German Minister of Agriculture, the greenest of Greens, who originally wanted to cover the whole of Europe in organic farms, has announced that he is introducing a law to license GM crops and has declared that there is no health risk to consumers? if the German Greens have seen the light, surely the Government will not allow our own eco-fundamentalists to stand in their way.

§ Lord Whitty
My Lords, the noble Lord's evangelism on this topic is fairly well known. We take seriously into account the concerns of the scientists. We also have to take into account the concerns of others in this respect, which is partly what our consultation was about. It was partly what we expected the ACRE advice to take into account and indeed it has.
916 The Government's approach to the issue has always been a balanced one. The German Government are clearly following through the necessities of the European legislation on that front, as indeed are we.

§ Baroness Hayman
My Lords, does my noble friend agree that while consumers, farmers and retailers will base their own decisions about GM crops and foods on a variety of personal reasons, the Government, in their regulatory role, must ensure that they keep to an evidence-based and scientifically based approach if they are to fulfil their responsibilities? Does he further agree that whether or not we grow GM crops in this country is not a matter of life and death to British agriculture, but it could be exactly that in parts of the developing world?

§ Lord Whitty
My Lords, while the arguments on the latter point are still subject to some dispute, there appear to be situations where the development of GM crops would help in development matters. The British Government need to bear that in mind.
Our own policy is evidence based, which is why we conducted the farm-scale trials in the first place and why the results from those trials on each individual crop should be taken into account before announcing a decision. The Government's approach has always been a precautionary one, but based on the facts of the case and on the way in which we approach the overall development of science in agriculture and in the development of these crops in particular.

§ Lord Dixon-Smith
My Lords, if the reason for rejecting GM crops for general use is the damage that their cultivation appears to do to biodiversity, what advice do the Government have for farmers when everything a farmer does by way of food production deliberately reduces biodiversity?

§ Lord Whitty
My Lords, the relative effects on biodiversity are precisely what the farm-scale trials were designed to discover: whether there was a particular or more serious effect on biodiversity and other environmental impacts of cultivating these particular GM crops than there was in relation to conventional crops of equivalent species. Yes, all farming changes the environment in which it operates, but the question is how far any particular form of farming does it in a more damaging way or a less damaging one.

§ Lord Livsey of Talgarth
My Lords, will the Minister consider further trials before releasing GM crops into the environment? He will know that the trials conducted by his department had very mixed results indeed. Will his department respect the view of the National Assembly for Wales in relation to GM crops?

§ Lord Whitty
My Lords, we always respect the views of the National Assembly for Wales, but whether we agree with them or not will vary. The trials were on three specific crops for the particular reason that we wanted to draw general lessons from them. If further 917 trials are needed, we will engage in them. However, we have a fair amount of information on the three crops involved.

§ Baroness Whitaker
My Lords, my noble friend says that the jury is still out on the usefulness of GM crops in places where people do not have enough food to eat. Does he agree that in China and India rice crops have been enormously increased by GM techniques?

§ Lord Whitty
My Lords, yes, I believe that that is true, although some would argue that there are some downsides to that. I am not arguing that there is no benefit and I am seriously concerned that if we prevented GM crops being developed in Europe, there may be a serious development impact on third world countries. Nevertheless, one has to take into account the overall environmental and economic effects on growth in those countries as well as in the UK.

§ Lord Swinfen
My Lords, when considering this matter, will the Government take into account the distance that wind-borne pollen and insect-borne pollen can travel? How far do the Government estimate that pollen can be taken by the wind and insects?

§ Lord Whitty
My Lords, if we go ahead with growing GM crops, the Government clearly have to take into account the co-existence rules between GM and other crops. We must take into account the degree to which other, conventional crops may be vulnerable to contamination—without using that as a pejorative term—by GM seed. The distance will depend on the topography and the crops involved, so there is no general answer to the noble Lord's question.