LONDON (M2 Communications) -- Lawyers acting for an organic farmer, supported by Friends of the Earth and the Soil Association, are today starting judicial review proceedings against the Government for its failure to halt a genetically-engineered crop trial. The result of any court action could affect all 20 national seed listing trials involving ge-crops and seriously delay the commercial planting of ge-crops in the UK.
Organic food and farming standards do not permit genetic engineering. The trial at Hood Barton, Dartington, Devon is being undertaken for the Ministry of Agriculture by the National Institute for Agricultural Botany (NIAB) and is next door to the organic farm owned by Mr Guy Watson. The Soil Association has indicated that Mr Watson could lose his organic certification if his produce is contaminated. The genetically-engineered maize is due to pollinate in July: the moment of maximum risk of contamination from cross pollination.
The legal action follows the failure of the Government's Advisory Committee on Releases to the Environment (ACRE) to respond to new evidence submitted by FOE on the trial showing irregularities and serious data gaps. ACRE has referred a decision on the case to Ministers, who have also failed to intervene. A formal submission setting out the grounds for the judicial review was sent to Environment Minister Michael Meacher and Agriculture Minister Lord Donoghue last week.
The submission argues that the trial is unlawful because:
- the effects upon the organic farmer's business were not considered when the consent was given
- the Government has not acted on new information as to the risks of genetic pollution provided by FOE
- NIAB does not have the required permission to release genetically engineered organisms into the environment [2]
- the Government has not met its legal obligation under the 1982 Seeds Regulations to ensure that applicants for trial licenses must submit the results of two replicated trials [3].
Despite this legal submission and earlier repeated letters from FOE, Soil Association and Mr Watson's lawyers pointing out these irregularities, Ministers have failed to act. Therefore, Mr Watson has no option but to proceed to judicial review.
Robin Maynard, acting Campaigns Director of Friends of the Earth said: "The Government is allowing this genetic experiment to take place in flagrant disregard of its own rules supposedly governing genetic engineering. We're constantly told that this questionable technology is tightly regulated, yet this case reveals the rule book has been chucked out of the window. Commercial pressures are over-ruling public and environmental safety. Resorting to the courts is an expensive, last-ditch attempt to force Ministers to respect the law and regain control of this runaway industry."
Richard Young, Soil Association said: "It is totally unacceptable that genetically-engineered crops can be allowed to contaminate or impair organic farming. We strongly support this organic farmer who is standing up for his livelihood against the threat of genetic pollution. Ministers must intervene to halt this trial and tighten regulations so that farmers, organic and other, can exercise their rights to pursue their legitimate businesses without genetic interference."
NOTES TO EDITORS:
[1] Jeff Rooker, Food Safety Minister recently stated: "It is our job to regulate their outturn (ge-industry).... and to make sure that every conceivable check and balance and a very stiff regulatory approval process is in place." Environmental Audit Committee, 31st March 1998.
[2] The seed listing trials are being undertaken for MAFF by NIAB. But NIAB does not hold its own GMO release consent for such trials as required, but purports to rely on the consent held by the relevant companies. In essence, two areas of law governing the regulations pertaining to seed listing and GMOs have been muddled and improperly applied by Government.
[3] In answer to a parliamentary question on 14th May 1998, the Minister (Jeff Rooker) stated that his Department has not required applicants to comply with this regulation since 1995, '...experience has shown that this information is of little value in assessing National List applications and the Department has not required applicants to comply with [this] provision since 1995.' This is flatly contrary to the law. It is not open to the Government to adopt a policy or practice serving to dispense with this statutory obligation.
Comments on this posting?
Click here to post a public comment on the Trash Talk Bulletin Board.
Click here to send a private comment to the Junkman.
Copyright © 1998 Steven J. Milloy. All rights reserved on original material. Material copyrighted by others is used either with permission or under a claim of "fair use." Site developed and hosted by WestLake Solutions, Inc.
Material presented on this home page constitutes opinion of Steven J. Milloy.