Hampshire County Council

Executive Member - Policy and Resources

25 July 2003

GM Nation? Debate

Report of the Director of Property, Business and Regulatory Services and the Director of Environment

Item

1

Summary

1.1

The following decisions are sought:

That the County Council:

(i) adopts and disseminates a precautionary policy relating to genetic modification, (including a press release as appropriate);

(ii) responds to the GM Debate Steering Board in line with Section 5 of this report - Precautionary Policy;

(iii) continues with its Food Standards activities, including the routine testing of meals sold on Hampshire County Council premises for genetically modified ingredients; and

(iv) considers the appropriateness of holding its own debate on genetic modification later in the year to further involve Hampshire public and businesses.

2

Reason(s)

2.1

Hampshire County Council has received numerous enquiries from the public

asking for its stance on the GM Debate. Requests for the County Council to

publicise the debate and to consider the facilitation of a local debate were also

received.

3

Other options considered and rejected

3.1

None.

4

Conflicts of interest declared by the decision-maker or a member or officer consulted

4.1

None.

5

Dispensation granted by the Standards Committee

5.1

Not applicable

6

Reason(s) for the matter being dealt with if urgent

6.1

Not applicable

Approved by:

..........................

Date of decision:

.........................

Councillor T K Thornber

Hampshire County Council

Executive Member - Policy and Resources

25 July 2003

GM Nation? Debate

Report of the Director of Property, Business and Regulatory Services and the Director of Environment

Item

1

Summary

1.1

The Government are supporting a national debate on the genetic modification (GM) of organisms through an administrative body called GM Nation which is headed up by Professor Malcolm Grant. The purpose of this report is to establish the County Council's stance on the GM debate.

2.

Background

2.1

The national Genetic Modification (GM) debate "GM Nation?" was launched on 3 June 2003 at a conference in Birmingham. Five further debates took place in June in Swansea, Taunton, Belfast, Glasgow and Harrogate.

2.2

The debate is led by Professor Malcolm Grant of Cambridge University and is funded via a £500,000 Government grant. The proposal to promote a wider national GM debate came from the Biotechnology Commission (AEBC) in its report "Crops on Trial" published in September 2001. The Environment Secretary, Margaret Beckett, asked Professor Grant to set up a steering board in July 2002 to set the debate in motion.

2.3

The steering board has launched a website (www.gmnation.org.uk) to promote the debate. Individuals and organisations are encouraged to set up their own local debate in addition to the six national conferences. A toolkit, including film, CD-ROM and booklet are included. Local Authorities are also targets for leveraging the campaign.

2.4

The County Council has not yet organised a debate in Hampshire due to difficulties in obtaining information from the organisers about the consultation process. According to the website, the only local authority debate was held in Cambridgeshire on 7th July. So far anyone interested in taking part locally has been encouraged to visit the website and download the toolkit. The deadline for responses to the consultation is 18 July 2003.

3.

Hampshire County Council's activities relating To Genetic Modification

3.1

The County Council has a longstanding interest in the GM debate. or example, on the Food Standards side:

(i) In 1999, following a survey of service users, the County Council put in place a policy that it would not provide meals with detectable GM ingredients in schools, social services establishments and employee restaurants;

(ii) the County Council also funded a joint research project between its Scientific Service and Portsmouth University to develop a new test to detect GM ingredients in food. The Scientific Service still carries out regular tests on foods sold in County Council premises to ensure compliance with that policy; and

(iii) the Trading Standards Food Team also regularly conducts sampling from Hampshire food businesses to ensure that GM labelling laws are respected. The Scientific Service led a regional GM sampling campaign covering all of the South East Trading Standards Authorities in 2001.

3.2

In addition to the food standards aspects of GM, the environmental impacts are of relevance to the County Council. In particular, the Council's stance on GM crop trials on Hampshire farms would be of public interest. Key environmental points include:

(i) according to latest research, there are no GM crop trials in Hampshire. To date, no GM crops have been permitted on Hampshire County Council land;

(ii) the County Council has a policy of minimising herbicide and pesticide usage on its land. It is claimed that certain GM crops are resistant to these chemicals. This enables farmers to apply fewer, higher dosage applications resulting in lower usage overall; and

(iii) although GM is a global issue, the County Council may wish to express a precautionary stance, bearing in mind the power of GM science to create new organisms. Before GM, species evolved via natural selection. However, GM opens up the opportunity to swap plant genes with animal genes and vice versa. There is no way of predicting the long term effects of this "unnatural" selection process. There are also worries that, despite segregation, non-GM crops will become contaminated with GM crops via normal pollination routes (air and insect).

3.3

It is recommended that the County Council establishes and disseminates a policy covering both the Food Standards and Environmental issues raised by the use of Genetic Modification. The following section highlights the key issues for consideration.

4.

Genetic modification - key issues

4.1

What is GM?

(i) Genetic Modification (GM) involves moving genetic material from the cells of one organism to those of another, be they related or unrelated. This can include translating genetic information from plants to animals and vice versa.

(ii) GM is initially a laboratory process. A common soil bacterium that naturally transfers genes into plant cells is the preferred method for producing new GM crops, although there are other techniques. Isolated cells or tissues from the plant are treated with the bacterium containing the new genes. The bacteria are then removed and plants grown from cells containing the new genes.

4.2

What is the current extent of GM production?

(i) Globally, the four main GM crops being grown commercially are soybean (36.5 million hectares, or more than 62 per cent of the global soybean area), maize (19 per cent), cotton (13 per cent) and oilseed rape (5 per cent).

(ii) In 2002, GM crops grown worldwide covered twice the land area of Britain (58.7 million hectares), a 12 per cent increase on 2001, and this figure is growing rapidly. By land area, the vast majority (99 per cent) of GM crops are grown in four countries: the US, Argentina, Canada and China, with the US accounting for around two-thirds of the world total. GM crops are also commercially grown in Australia, Bulgaria, Colombia, Germany, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Mexico, Romania, South Africa, Spain and Uruguay.

(iii) Currently, food ingredients from varieties of GM soya, maize and oilseed rape have been approved for food use in the European Union although very little is actually used. No fresh GM produce has been approved for sale or consumption in the UK.

(iv) There is no way of telling if a food contains GM ingredients by tasting it. Different countries take different positions on labelling of foods containing GM foods or derivatives from them (eg oil from GM maize). In the US, labelling is not mandatory. In the UK and the rest of the European Union, food must be labelled if it contains more than 1 per cent of GM ingredients.

4.3

What are the stated benefits of GM?

(i) GM crops produce higher yields, resulting in lower costs

(ii) some GM crops require less pesticide usage

(iii) some GM crops have less insect damage and lower mycotoxin levels

(iv) potential future crops can be vitamin-enhanced or nutrient enriched

(v) improved oil profiles could help reduce coronary diseases

(vi) GM helps Third World subsistence farmers move out of the poverty trap

(vii) potential to replace fossil fuels with GM biofuels.

4.4

What are the potential disadvantages of GM?

(i) genetic pollution could damage ecosystems

(ii) GM could lead to unpredictable results in the environment

(iii) some environmental risks will be irreversible, so are high risk

(iv) the long term health effects of eating GM food is unknown

(v) GM companies could have too much economic power particularly with seed in third world countries

4.5

The combination of the irreversible environmental risks and the potential power of the science of genetic modification point to the need for extreme caution in undertaking open field trials of genetically modified crops unless the necessary controls are in place.

4.6

GM related Correspondence received by Hampshire County Council

4.6.1

In June, the County Council received a number of requests from the public asking that a local debate be organised and also criticising the County Council for not disseminating a clear policy on GM. Some of the key questions raised were:

(i) Why isn't Hampshire County Council organising a local debate?

(ii) Why doesn't the County Council use the press to promote the debate?

(iii) How are people being encouraged to take part?

(iv) What is the County Council's stance on GM?

5.

The Precautionary Approach

5.1

Although there may be a number of potential advantages associated with genetic modification of crops, it is too early to state with certainty that genetically modification will not have long term environmental or even nutritional disadvantages. For these reasons it is recommended that the County Council maintains its precautionary approach to the use of GM ingredients in County Council meals and that this policy be extended to cover environmental issues, particularly relating to the growing of GM crops on County Council land.

6

Deadline for consultation responses

6.1

The deadline for responses to the consultation is 18^th July 2003 and a

holding response has been given to provide the time for this matter to be

considered formally by the Executive Member.

Recommendation(s)

That the County Council:

1

Prepares, adopts and disseminates a precautionary policy relating to genetic modification, (including a press release as appropriate)

2

Responds to the GM Debate Steering Board in line with section 5 above.

3

Continues with its Food Standards activities, including the routine testing of meals sold on Hampshire County Council premises for GM ingredients.

4.

Considers the appropriateness of holding its own GM debate later in the year to further involve Hampshire public and businesses.