16 February 2003

MEACHER: MY FEARS OVER GM CROPS / SADDAM AND GM

1.MEACHER: MY FEARS OVER GM CROPS
2.Meacher's attack on GM crops reveals tensions
3.Saddam Hussein and genetically modified foods

***

1.MEACHER: MY FEARS OVER GM CROPS

By Andrew Woodcock, Political Correspondent, PA News
Sun Feb 16, 2003

Genetically modified crops are "not necessary" to feed mankind, environment minister Michael Meacher said in an interview published today.

Mr Meacher told The Ecologist magazine that he worried about unpredictable consequences of GM technology decades in the future and had doubts over whether biotechnology companies were telling the truth about their own trials of the crops.

His forthright comments put him at odds with Prime Minister Tony Blair, who has spoken out in support of the new technology and its potential benefits for food production.

And they risk pre-empting a government announcement on whether large-scale GM cultivation will be permitted in the UK. The Government's official position is that no decision will be made until crop trials finish later this year.

Mr Meacher outlined his concerns: "The real problem is whether 10, 20, 30 years down the track, serious and worrying things happen that none of us ever predicted.

"It's these sorts of totally unpredicted problems that make me very, very cautious.

"The human race has existed on this planet for about a quarter of a million years. We have been feeding ourselves perfectly adequately since overcoming problems of hunger in our early existence. GM is not necessary."  The Government does not have the resources to conduct its own trials of GM technology, he said.

"The question is, can we trust the companies and be sure that they are telling us all they know?

"When asked if the system is adequate, it is difficult to give the answer, `Yes'. The system is very trusting and that is very worrying."

***

2.Meacher's  attack on GM crops reveals tensions

By Nigel Morris, Political Correspondent
The Independent, 17 February 2003
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/environment/story.jsp?story=379083

A damning attack by Michael Meacher, the Environment minister, on genetically modified foods was disowned by his own department yesterday.

Mr Meacher, the minister responsible for GM food, said biotechnology was "not necessary" to feed the world and raised fears that genetically modified crops could present a long-term health risk to consumers.

"The human race has existed on this planet for about a quarter of a million years," Mr Meacher said. "We have been feeding ourselves perfectly adequately since overcoming problems of hunger in our early existence. GM is not necessary."

Mr Meacher's gloomy warning contrasts starkly with Tony Blair's avowed enthusiasm for the potential "massive" benefits of the technology.

The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, headed by Margaret Beckett, described Mr Meacher's attack as "his views" and indicated there was "creative tension" within Government on the issue.

Ministers are due to announce later this year whether they will permit GM crops to be grown commercially after years of tests.

But in an interview in The Ecologist magazine, published today, Mr Meacher makes no secret of his hostility to the idea, leaving his position in Government untenable if large-scale cultivation gets the go-ahead.

"The real problem is whether 10, 20, 30 years down the track, serious and worrying things happen that none of us ever predicted," he said. "It's these sorts of totally unpredicted problems that make me cautious."

Mr Meacher also took a swipe at Lord Sainsbury, the Science minister, who is linked to biotechnology firms.

Pointing out that the Government does not have the money or manpower to conduct its own tests, Mr Meacher doubted whether food companies can be trusted to give objective advice.

"The question is, can we trust the companies and be sure that they are telling us all they know? When asked if the system [of testing] is adequate, it is difficult to give the answer, 'Yes'. The system is trusting and that is worrying."

The Government announced a national debate on GM technology last year to form the basis of a decision on whether to allow commercialisation.

Mr Blair has described biotechnology as the edge of a new scientific discovery, but acknowledged that some part of public opinion regards it as a threat.

"Now we are facing a frontier of this kind," he said. "The science of biotechnology will probably be, to the first half of the 21st century, what the computer was to the second half of the 20th century. Its implications are profound; its benefits, potential and massive."

Downing Street refused to endorse Mr Meacher's comments yesterday. A spokeswoman said: "That's a matter for [the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs]."

Mr Meacher has repeatedly risked the wrath of ministerial colleagues with his outspoken comments. He has admitted that Britain was being pressed by the US to allow commercial planting.

***

3.Europe's Ban on Genetically Modified Foods Strains

Knight-Ridder Tribune, February 16, 2003

Wayne Falda, South Bend Tribune, Ind.

Who would have thought a year ago that Saddam Hussein and genetically modified foods would be inextricably linked these days?  But there is little doubt that both Hussein and biotechnology are clearly at the heart of two very different kind of wars, both of which have put the United States at odds with Europe. First is the question about a shooting war with Iraq.  Second is the question of trade war with the European Community regarding its four-year moratorium on imports of biotechnology crops. Both issues are well on their way toward escalating beyond the tough stance and the threatening rhetoric. In either case, the outcome is bound to affect relations between the United States and Europe for a long time.

The public policy dialogue held Thursday in Washington by the Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology made it clear that there are hawks and doves over the European Union's ban on genetically modified foods just as there are hawks and doves in the issue of war with Iraq.

Ray Suarez, who served as moderator for the dialogue and is senior correspondent of PBS Newshour and former host of National Public Radio's "Talk of the Nation" says he sees the biotech stew containing chunks and elements of science, politics, economics, questions of national sovereignty, international law and strategies between nations, adding, "I find this topic devilishly complicated, and thus, fascinating," and that the biotech issue is not simply a question of who is right and who is wrong "because people on many sides of this issue agreed that if the United States heads to the World Trade Organization with a complaint over European treatment of GM food, it will likely win."

But the central issue before the doves and hawks on both issues: "Is it prudent for the Bush Administration to act on its widely-publicized threats?" The doves on the WTO issue include Clyde Prestowitz, president of the Economic Strategy Institute and Julia Moore, a public policy scholar at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.

Both warned that Europeans see the United States both as a military superpower and an agricultural superpower that acts as the world's bully.

The hawks on the WTO issue were represented on the Pew panel by Christopher A.  Padilla, assistant U. S. trade representative for Intergovernmental Affairs and Public Liaison and Ron Gaskill, director of regulatory relations for the American Farm Bureau Federation.  "We have waited long enough," Gaskill said.