Time to push for positive perspective on GM crops

Published on Sunday 22 November 2009 21:03

ONE of the workers on my father's farm was a Polish ex- serviceman who struggled manfully with the English language. When he chose the wrong word or pronunciation, his work colleagues would mock him. One day, annoyed by the ribaldry at his expense, he blurted out "You think I know damn nothing, I tell you I know damn all."

In this past week, I have felt I could have joined him in not understanding why a certain political stance continues to be rigidly maintained. For me, the potential biotechnology offers is incredible and, as we continue to unpick the genetic complexities, the opportunities explode exponentially.

I listened to an inspired speech by Professor Peter Gregory, chief executive of the Scottish Crop Research Institute, pointing out the potential that could come to the farming industry within a few years through the use of gene markers. These would guide the way forward to an era where new potato varieties did not need the regular and constant use of chemical sprays to keep them healthy.

This was not the talk of a mad scientist but one of sheer enthusiasm laced with the knowledge of how fast biotechnology was moving and the opportunities it was opening up. For the farmers listening, it must have sounded like manna as they no doubt visualised their annual spray bills being cast aside.

For environmentalists, the technology has a great deal going for it. There will be no nasty chemical sprays to complain about. Some of the older organic brigade will recall that, little more than a decade ago, the Soil Association almost adopted biotech as the way forward.

I did wonder about the downside to spuds that did not suffer from eelworm, aphids or blight, and the only one I could think of was there may be more to sell and this year, with an overloaded market, that's a big minus.

But we are fortunate in this country that we have sufficient food and the luxury of being able to make such a decision without it affecting our bellies. So then we move over to the politicians and this is where biotechnology seems to run into deep sand.

Environment minister Roseanna Cunningham, on her visit to AgriScot, seemed to be firmly stuck in the groove that reckons genetic modification (GM) is a bad thing.

"I have heard many promises for GM but most advances have been made through conventional plant breeding techniques" was her response when the issue was raised.

She is not alone in this as many politicians in many parties still see the words "Frankenstein food" whenever biotechnology is mentioned.

So the Scottish farming industry faces a challenge as to how to persuade the politicians to look again at what is happening.

First of all, they require to cast out of their minds the trials on oilseed rape that were genetically engineered to be resistant to a certain weed-killer. Although passing one of those sites almost on a weekly basis, I see none of the contamination and pollution of the soil that some doom-sayers were predicting.

Equally, in the hundreds of thousands of acres of GM crops now grown in many, many countries, there seems to be no negative effects to the land, the people working with the crops or even the consumers.

The biggest fankle with GM crops is the current mess the EU has contrived to create with boatloads of perfectly good animal feeds being returned across oceans because they have some GM produce in the cargo.

Nothing is said about the GM food that comes through our supermarkets, because they are allowed to use the weasel words "all our produce is GM free" in signs around their stores when they know that this statement allows there to be a small percentage of GM produce included within the food.

Perhaps, the solution to breaking through the present impasse lies not in the plant world but in biotechnological advances in animals. These will bring forward resistance and cures for some diseases of the human race.

Once these are available it will be difficult for politicians to resist biotechnology. Faced with someone ailing from a debilitating disease, it will be difficult to say, "No, the remedy lies with a genetically modified organism and that is not allowed".