GM food ban would be 'illegal'UK '03
Consumer groups say watchdog 'has GM bias', '03
GM Food Scandal Puts Labour on Spot'99
Monsanto Owns Patent '99
Row over Sainsbury's GM patents '99
Wales and Scotland REFUSE GMOs! '04
Felicity Lawrence The government says it may
be forced to allow farmers to
grow genetically-modified
(GM) crops in Britain even if
the public does not want
them.
The environment minister
Michael Meacher told the BBC a
ban on GM crops would be
illegal unless there is scientific
proof that they harm people or
the environment.
The latest polls show only 14% of people in Britain approve of
GM food.
But Mr Meacher told BBC Radio 4's Farming Today that public
opposition alone would not influence the government's
decision.
"We have to act in accordance with the law," he said on
Monday.
"The law at the present moment is set down in a EU directive
and the key and sole criteria for taking action with regard to
GM crops is: Are they a harm or risk to the environment?"
'No evidence'
Later this year the government will decide whether to license
commercial GM crops.
Scientists investigating the effects of GM crops on the
government's behalf have yet to find they cause harm.
Two weeks ago, the Royal Society said there was no
evidence eating GM foods was any different from eating
naturally produced food.
A senior member of the society said the public had been
frightened by "unsubstantiated claims".
A widespread public consultation on the issue is due to begin
in two weeks.
Crops attacked
On Sunday, protesters cut down a GM crop in Fife. The
rapeseed crop was the second in a week in Scotland to be
attacked.
A spokeswoman for the protesters said: "It expresses people's
serious fears for the safety of public health, for consumers'
right to choose GM-free food and their fears of a long-term
environmental catastrophe."
Environmental campaigners Friends of the Earth said Mr.
Meacher's comments showed the government would ignore
the public "if it felt like it".
Felicity Lawrence The Food Standards Agency was condemned last week for taking a pro-industry
stand over GM technology. The Consumers' Association, the National Consumer
Council, and Sustain, the alliance for better food and farming, accused the
agency of prejudicing the Government's own public debate on whether or not
commercial genetically modified crops should be grown in Britain. The Food Standards Agency was condemned last week for taking a pro-industry
stand over GM technology. The Consumers' Association, the National Consumer
Council, and Sustain, the alliance for better food and farming, accused the
agency of prejudicing the Government's own public debate on whether or not
commercial genetically modified crops should be grown in Britain. The three
groups have written to the FSA chairman, Sir John Krebs, criticising the
agency's website for claiming to offer impartial information on the issue, but
giving "one side of the argument" and failing "to address the potential risks
and consumer concerns about the long-term health impact of genetic
modification". The attack has intensified a rumbling row over whether or not the Government has
already decided to give the green light to GM crops. The Government set up an independent public debate to air the issues with
interested parties, and a report on that debate is due to go to the Department
for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs in September. An economic study into the
benefits of GM crops is meanwhile being conducted by the Prime Minister's
strategy unit and is also due to report in September. But an unnamed minister
has been quoted in newspaper reports saying that a decision on GM has already
been taken. Sir John Krebs is known for his pro-GM views, as is Tony Blair. The FSA has
opposed labelling products as GM-free, saying such a move would be
unenforceable. NOTE (LD Hammond): On April 17, 2003, the Guardian Weekly reported that one of Blair's top scientific advisors,
Sir Tom Blundell, has accused the GM study as being "fixed". The promised public debate, scheduled between May and July of '03,
cannot possibly impact the science review and "Strategic Unit's" economic study, which is due to publish its results in May and June of the same year
(NOT September it seems, as stated in the
above article). Also of interest is that farm trials, which were "designed to discover the effects of GM crops
on the environment", will be excluded from the debate as they haven't yet been completed. This leads many to believe that the Blair government intends to push though the commercial growing of GM crops on UK soil, without adequate test results and without considering the findings of the scheduled
"public debate". It reminds me of the Iraq strategy. Pretend to go to the UN and ask them to contribute to the debate- as if it could change the direction of events.
Meanwhile, the invasion is set to go and lucrative contracts have already been
granted to your US friends to deal with the aftermath of the onslaught. Next- arrange that the insignificants in the UN whose opinions you despise are required through their consciences
to help pay for the massive clean-up- but NOT, of course, reap the benefits of the booty. That's ALL for you and your buddies- not those ingrates who refused to
agree with your plan in the first place. And why weren't any of those billion dollar contracts sent in the direction of Blair, the US' bestest buddy? Hell, how much
did he contribute to your election campaign and besides, he'll just grin and bear it. It's the British way. Laurie Flynn and Michael Sean Gillard LORD
Sainsbury of Turville, the
The controversy is focused on the
Tony Blair insisted there was no scientific
justification for a moratorium on the introduction of GM foods.
"There is no GM food that can be sold in this country without going
through a very long regulatory process," he said. But
As The inventor of the patent is listed as
Michael Wilson, who until 1988 worked at the John Innes Institute that shares
facilities with the Sainsbury plant biology lab in Norwich. Mr Wilson
worked at the Scottish Crop Research Institute (SCRI) as the deputy
director during Dr Pusztai's research project. The SCRI, which
collaborated in aspects of the Pusztai research programme, was said
to be uncomfortable with Dr Pusztai's preliminary findings. Lord
Sainsbury was reported last month as saying he would stand aside in
the case of a genuine conflict of interest. He is also in charge of
the Office of Science and Technology, which monitors government
funding of research and controls official science policy. Vegetarian food
sold under the late Linda McCartney's brand
name includes genetically modified soya,
according to a BBC report. Her husband, Sir
Paul McCartney, countered that the finding had not been proved, but
admitted "contamination'' may have taken place
when GM soya was mixed with other
soya. Laurie Flynn and Michael Sean Gillard Lord Sainsbury, the supermarket billionaire and science minister, said last week
he did not own the patent of the cauliflower mosaic gene that has highlighted
the potential risks of genetically modified food. It is owned by the
biotechnology giant, Monsanto.
But he accepted that he does own the rights to a genetic enhancer that was
developed to act as a booster to the key gene used in GM food technology.
Lord Sainsbury said his own patent had no link with the work of Dr Arpad
Pusztai, which showed that rats fed GM potatoes suffered damage to vital organs
and a weakened immune system. The editor of the Guardian, Alan Rusbridger, said:
"We accept that we misidentified the gene which Lord Sainsbury patented . . .
and we apologise for that error."
Diatech, the biotechnology company which Lord Sainsbury put into a blind trust
last year, submitted a patent application in June 1987 describing a genetic
sequence taken from the tobacco mosaic virus. The application looked at how this
genetic sequence could enhance the development of protein in a genetically
modified organism.
During research leading to the application, the gene sequence was attached to
the cauliflower mosaic virus promoter to act as a booster to Monsanto's
promoter, which is used in most GM foods available worldwide. For more on Blair, see "Tony Blair and GMOs" Antony Barnett, Public Affairs Editor Row over Sainsbury's GM patents Science Minister Lord Sainsbury stands to make substantial profits from a company which now owns the rights for three biotech products
integral to the future of GM food technology, The Observer can reveal.
Sainsbury indirectly owns a firm, Diatech, that controls the patents based around a collection of genes taken from the tobacco plant, known
as the Omega sequence. The process makes genetic modification more than 100 times more effective and scientists claim it has the potential
to make millions of pounds in royalties.
Documents filed at the US patent office, which have been seen by The Observer, show Diatech was granted three patents for its GM products
in February 1996, March 1997 and April this year. Diatech was transferred to Sainsbury's blind trust last July after he became a
Minister. This month he donated £2m to the Labour Party.
Earlier this year The Observer revealed how Diatech was helping to pay contractors to refurbish Sainsbury's £3 million country home. The
revelations piled further pressure on Tony Blair to sack the Science Minister after MPs and environmental campaigners claimed his
financial links to the GM industry made it impossible for him to act impartially and accused him of a significant conflict of interest.
Adrian Bebb, director of Friends of the Earth, said: 'It is now clear that if GM technology takes off in Britain Lord Sainsbury will make so
much money that even he will notice. This huge potential goldmine makes the idea of avoiding conflicts of interest through a blind trust
completely ridiculous.'
Sainsbury has not declared ownership of the patents in the House of Lords' register of interests because they are technically owned by his
blind trust. Before he became a Minister he simply listed in the register that he owned a 'licence on a biotechnology product'.
Shadow Environment Secretary John Redwood said: 'Lord Sainsbury must give a clear and full statement of his past and present interests in
the GM industry. He cannot hide behind his blind trust because if you own assets and investments that are not easily tradeable the blind trust
does not offer protection. It also appears he only declared one patent in the past when he may have owned more.'
Sainsbury funded the research that led to the Omega sequence being discovered during the 1980s. His chief scientific adviser, Dr Roger
Freedman, approved the payment for the work through Diatech which sponsored the research that was carried out at the John Innes Centre
in Norwich.
Dr Michael Wilson, chief executive of Horticultural Research International and the scientist who discovered the sequence, said: 'The unique
thing is that it can be used in virtually all GM processes. Put simply, it dramatically boosts the levels of protein produced in GM plants
which is necessary to make the gene function. This could be very useful in GM foods as well as in developing medicines.'
A researcher at the Scottish Crop Research Institute who worked with Wilson said: 'The view was that the Omega sequence could be a huge
commercial success in the future with companies like Monsanto licensing it for use in their products.'
The Observer has also established that under Sainsbury's ownership Diatech struck a deal with the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in
the US to jointly market the patent of another translational enhancer taken from the alfalfa plant.
Diatech refused to reveal who was paying for its products, although it is understood that genetically modified papayas being grown in Hawaii
are paying royalties to the firm. Earlier this year the Japanese signed a deal with Hawaiian papaya growers to import GM fruit. Such a deal
could be highly profitable for Diatech and Sainsbury.
In February, Sainsbury angrily dismissed claims he owned the patent to the cauliflower mosaic virus. He refused to comment, but a
spokesman for the Department of Trade and Industry said the Minister had no idea what he did or did not own in his blind trust and that, in
any case, he was not involved in policy decisions relating to GM foods.
However, earlier this year Sainsbury travelled to the US with members of the the Bio-Industry Association to investigate biotechnology
clusters. The association is viewed by campaigners as a lobby group for the GM industry and Diatech is a member. The DTI helped fund the
trip. Paul Brown
The Government has been forced to postpone plans to announce the go-ahead for genetically modified (GM) crops in Britain after Wales and Scotland refused to cooperate.The announcement, due to be made this week, was supposed to allow, in principle, the first GM crop to be sown in Britain, a strain of GM maize called Chardon LL or T25 and patented by Bayer.
The Welsh executive, which is keen to foster organic farming, declined to give permission for the crop. Scottish opposition to Chardon LL was more muted because maize is unsuitable to a colder climate. But the Scottish executive has also refused permission.
The Government was considering giving the green light for maize to be grown in England alone. But the Welsh executive pointed out that UK regu lations stipulate that a particular crop can be grown in one country only if the other two agree.
The postponement of the announcement comes a week before a key vote in Brussels on whether to end the EU moratorium on GM crops. The Government believes that Europe should be opened to GM imports and cultivation of crops and had hoped that an announcement of the go-ahead for the first British crops would precede the vote.
The devolved administrations of Wales and Scotland are not the only obstacles to the introduction of GM maize. Wording in the EU rules for cultivation of GM crops means the Department of Environment's intention to allow the maize to be grown close to conventional crops might be open to legal challenge because they will not sufficiently safeguard neighbouring farmers from contamination.
For sad continuation of this story, as Blair overrides public opposition to push through his pro-GM agenda, see "MORE on Tony Blair and GMOs" (The newest Labour tactic...)
GM food ban would be 'illegal'
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3038893.stm Consumer groups say watchdog 'has GM bias'
The Guardian Weekly 20-3-2003, p.7 GM Food Scandal Puts Labour on Spot
The Guardian Weekly Vol 160 Issue 8 for week ending February 21,
1999, Page 1Monsanto Owns Patent
The Guardian Weekly Volume 160 Issue 9 for week ending February 28, 1999, Page 9 Row over Sainsbury's GM patents
Campaigners attack Science Minister as US documents reveal Labour peer's biotech 'goldmine'
The Observer, Sunday September 19, 1999 Wales blocks GM planting
The Guardian Weekly 20-4-0212, page 11
or
or