Earl Baldwin of Bewdleyasked Her Majesty's Government:
In the light of the Answers by the Lord Sainsbury of Turville on 19 May (H.L. Deb., cols. 294–296) and 7 June (WA 121), (a) whether the Minister for the Environment was correctly quoted in The Times of 12 April as saying "Scientific opinion on genetically modified organisms is split and the new committee [Advisory Committee on Releases to the Environment] will reflect this", and if he was, (b) how this principle can be reconciled with the Answers already given; (c) whether this principle has general application to other committees; and (d) how it relates to the recruitment of "people's judges" to the main scientific advisory bodies to monitor GM developments. [HL3063]
§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (Lord Whitty)The quotation was taken from a briefing the Minister for the Environment gave to a journalist fromThe Times.
The Answers previously given by Lord Sainsbury of Turville on 19 May and 7 June explain that experts for advisory committees, such as ACRE, are chosen to reflect the range of scientific disciplines needed to evaluate the diversity of issues relevant to that committee.
The experts chosen to sit on ACRE are encouraged to have open minds on the scientific issues, and to take all the evidence into account before giving advice. This is particularly the case where there is a difference of opinion (a split) on a specific topic.
As Lord Sainsbury made clear in his previous Answers, appointments to committees are made on a case by case basis to ensure the optimum balance of expertise, while always working within the guidelines of the Commissioner for Public Appointments.
On 21 May, the Minister for the Cabinet Office announced the setting up of two new scientific advisory bodies on biotechnology. As he made clear, these bodies will include lay members ("people's judges") drawn from a broad range of interests, who will consult widely on the issues under discussion.