Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

New blow to Government on GM food as public debate confirms scepticism

Michael McCarthy
Thursday 17 July 2003 19:00 EDT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

The leading academic charged with overseeing the Government's public opinion exercise on the introduction of genetically modified crops admitted yesterday that there was widespread scepticism about their benefits.

The conclusion of Professor Malcolm Grant, chairman of the National GM debate, which ends today after more than 450 public meetings, will be another blow to Tony Blair's determined support for GM crops and food.

The debate, which has lasted six weeks, is the Government's much-trumpeted device for letting people have their say. The official report of the debate, thought to be the largest exercise of its kind, will be delivered to the Government at the end of September by Professor Grant, the new provost of University College London. Nearly 20,000 people have responded

Asked about the general mood, he said: "People are precautionary." There was widespread scepticism about GM crops and foods in general.

Professor Grant, formerly pro vice-chancellor of Cambridge University, emphasised that the material had yet to be fully analysed. No specific conclusions could be drawn.

But the scepticism, he said, was partly because people did not trust the agricultural research done by what they saw as private, profit-making companies such as Monsanto, rather than Government's agricultural research stations. It was also because the GM crops proposed - oilseed rape, maize and beet - did not appeal to people. "There is no perception of potential benefits on a consumer level," he said.

Professor Grant's comments will be especially unwelcome to Mr Blair, and to other pro-GM ministers such as Margaret Beckett, the Environment Secretary, and Lord Sainsbury of Turville, the Science minister, as it comes hard on the heels of another official GM exercise which did not go the way the Government may have wished, the Cabinet Office study of GM costs and benefits. This concluded last week that economic benefits from growing GM crops in Britain were likely to be limited.

A third official GM exercise, a review of GM science conducted by a panel led by Professor Sir David King, the Government's chief scientific adviser, will report on Monday.

Whether or not the debate has an influence on the decision to authorise the commercial growth of GM crops in Britain, expected in the autumn, remains to be seen. Mrs Beckett promised to "listen" to the conclusions - but not necessarily to take any account of them.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in