§ Mr. Simon ThomasTo ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs when she was informed that cattle feeding studies involving Chardon LL fodder maize had been requested by the(a) Advisory Committee on Releases into the Environment and (b) Advisory Committee on Animal Feedstuffs. [160574]
§ Mr. MorleyNeither the Advisory Committee on Releases to the Environment nor the Advisory Committee on Animal Feedingstuffs (ACAF) has requested cattle feeding studies involving Chardon LL fodder maize. ACAF has advised, on the basis of the data already submitted, that it is content that the T25 maize grain and its products pose no more risk as animal feed than non-GM maize varieties. The results of recent feeding trials to cattle have not yet been published or peer reviewed but I am not aware they have come to any different conclusion.
§ Mr. Simon ThomasTo ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (1) whether she has given consent for harvested Chardon LL fodder maize from farm-scale evaluation sites to be taken-off site and used in cattle-feeding studies at the Reading University Centre for Dairy Research; [160575]
700W(2) whether the Government's policy on harvested material from GM crops involved in the farm-scale evaluation programme being fed to animals or otherwise entering the food chain has changed; [160576]
(3) what steps she has taken to ensure that no milk or meat from the cattle involved in the Chardon LL feeding studies at Reading University has entered the food chain. [160577]
§ Mr. MorleyThe GM maize used in the farm scale evaluations has Europe wide marketing consent for use in animal feed so no consent was required to use the harvested crop in the cattle feeding study carried out at the University of Reading.
The agreement made with the Supply Chain Initiative on Modified Agricultural Crops (SCIMAC) in November 1999 requires that none of the produce from GM crop plantings in the UK will be used in a way which is of direct commercial benefit to the consent-holders during the farm scale evaluation period. The policy on use of harvested material, as outlined in the SCIMAC agreement, has not changed.
Although there is no legal requirement to withhold the milk or meat from the food chain and there is no discernable difference between meat and milk from animals fed GM feed and those not, the protocol for the Reading University study required that the milk from the dairy cows did not enter the food chain during the period of the study.
§ Alan SimpsonTo ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs when she was first informed that cattle feeding studies involving Chardon LL fodder maize had been requested by(a) the Advisory Committee on Releases to the Environment and (b) the Advisory Committee on Animal Feedingstuffs. [160633]
§ Mr. MorleyNeither the Advisory Committee on Releases to the Environment nor the Advisory Committee on Animal Feedingstuffs (ACAF) has requested cattle feeding studies involving Chardon LL fodder maize. ACAF has advised, on the basis of the data already submitted, that it is content that the T25 maize grain and its products pose no more risk as animal feed than non-GM maize varieties. The results of recent feeding trials to cattle have not yet been published or peer reviewed but I am not aware they have come to any different conclusion.
§ Joan RuddockTo ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will make public the locations proposed in applications to grow Chardon LL T25 maize. [161362]
§ Mr. MorleyWe will consider whether the locations of commercial GM crop sites should be made public when we consult stakeholders in due course on the co-existence issue.
§ Mr. Peter AinsworthTo ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will establish who paid for the research on the GM farm scale evaluations undertaken by members of the Scientific Steering Committee and published by Nature on 5 March. [161520]
701W
§ Mr. Morley[holding answer 15 March 2004]: The research published in the Nature paper "Ban on triazine herbicides likely to reduce but not negate relative benefits of GMHT maize cropping" (Nature AOP; published online 4 March 2004) was undertaken by the authors at the expense of their respective institutes (listed on the paper). Defra and Scottish Executive paid for the data collected in the farm-scale evaluations, on which the paper was based, but did not commission this work. None of the authors were members of the Scientific Steering Committee. The research was peer reviewed by scientists not involved in the FSEs.
§ Andrew GeorgeTo ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs pursuant to her statement of 9 March 2004,Official Report, columns 1381–84, on GM policy,(1) what new evidence applicants for the recently approved GM fodder maize need to provide before the renewal of the contract to grow this crop before October 2006; [161523]
(2) what new evidence is required by consent holders prior to the renewal of their consents in October 2006 that is not required now. [161614]
§ Mr. Morley[holding answer 15 March 2004]: Existing consents for genetically modified organisms issued under Part C of Directive 90/220, including that for GM maize T25 issued in 1998, continue in force until October 2006. At that time new consents must be obtained or the product withdrawn. Directive 2001/18/EC and EC Food and Feed Regulations 1829/2003 set out the required information and assessments to be provided by the applicants. Information provided to support the original 90/220 application must be updated to account for technical progress and relevant new information. The applicants must also provide an environmental risk assessment as set out in Annex II of the new directive. In the case of GM crops this must include an assessment of the GMO and its use which have the potential to cause adverse effects as compared with those presented by the non-modified crop and its use under corresponding situations, such as weed management with herbicides. Applicants must also provide a post market monitoring plan and information on methods for detection and identification to facilitate post marketing control and inspection.
§ Joan RuddockTo ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what assessment she has made of the preliminary results of research carried out by Professor Terje Traavik of the Norwegian Institute of Gene Ecology on the health implications of GM maize crops for those living close to the crops. [161724]
§ Mr. Morley[holding answer 16 March 2004]: We understand that at a recent meeting in Malaysia, Professor Terje Traavik reported that farm workers from the island of Mindanao in the Phillipines had an immune reaction to genetically modified Bt maize (event MON 810). No scientific evidence has yet been published by the Norwegian research team on the health implications of Bt maize crops for those living close to such crops and Professor Traavik is quoted as stressing that more tests are needed before any definite conclusion can be drawn.
702WBt maize is not grown in the UK. If Professor Traavik's work is published we will consider whether there are any implications for the UK.
§ Joan RuddockTo ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs pursuant to her oral statement of 9 March,Official Report, columns 1381 to 1396 on GM crops, if she will assess the work of Aaron de Grassi at the Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex, on GM crops in Africa. [161727]
§ Mr. Morley[holding answer 16 March 2004]: We are aware of the work published by Aaron de Grassi evaluating various projects involving the development of GM crops for cultivation in Africa. While we have no plans to assess his work, we are always interested in quality research on GM crops and their application.
§ Llew SmithTo ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will publish her Department's assessment of the section of the GM national consultation concerned with the practicality of co-existence between GM and non-GM crops. [161758]
§ Mr. MorleyA detailed response to the findings of the GM Dialogue is available at www.defra.qov.uk/environment/gm/debate/pdf/gmdialogue-response.pdf. We believe there is no reason in principle why GM and non-GM crops should not co-exist, and our recent policy statement confirmed how we intend to move forward on this subject. We will consult stakeholders on co-existence measures based on the 0.9 per cent. EU labelling threshold for GM presence, and on whether a lower threshold might apply for organic production.
§ Llew SmithTo ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will conduct investigations into the feasibility of GM free zones being established in areas in Wales and Scotland bordering England where English farmers cultivating border farms decide to grow GM crops. [161781]
§ Mr. MorleyUnder EU law it is not possible to establish compulsory or statutory GM-free zones, but we have said that we will provide guidance to farmers who may want to establish voluntary zones in which GM crops are not cultivated. English farmers on the border with Wales and Scotland will have the right to grow an approved GM crop subject to the co-existence measures that are put in place, so the scope for voluntary GM-free zones in areas bordering England will have to be considered in that light. We will he liaising closely with the Devolved Administrations on these issues.
§ Gregory BarkerTo ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will make a further statement on(a) her plans to introduce legislation in respect of GM crop liability and co-existence and (b) the timescale for those plans. [162373]
§ Mr. Morley[holding answer 18 March 2004]: We intend to have co-existence measures that have statutory backing in place before any commercial cultivation of GM crops, which we do not expect before spring 2005 at the earliest. We plan to consult stakeholders on this shortly, and on options for compensating non-GM farmers for financial losses that they may incur.
703W
§ Andrew GeorgeTo ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs pursuant to her statement of 9 March 2004,Official Report, columns 1381–84, on GM policy, who will determine the conditions required to achieve the first condition of not resulting in adverse effects on the environment; and when those conditions will be made public. [161615]
§ Mr. MorleyOn 9 March officials wrote to the French Competent Authority, which issued the relevant consents on behalf of the EU member states, and proposed that restrictions be placed on the existing marketing consents for cultivation of maize containing transformation events T25 and BT176. In accordance with Directive 2001/18 the French Competent Authority will now forward an assessment report to the Commission who will forward it to all the other member states. A collective EU decision will be made on the proposal for amending the conditions of the consent.
A copy of the letter to the French Competent Authority will be published on the Defra website and placed on the public register.
§ Andrew GeorgeTo ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs pursuant to her statement of 9 March 2004,Official Report, columns 1381–84, on GM policy, when decisions will be made on thresholds for GM contamination of organic farms; and who will make the decision. [161616]
§ Mr. MorleyWe will take decisions in liaison with the Devolved Administrations, after we have consulted stakeholders. We will initiate a consultation exercise as soon as possible.