Contact: Paul Berryman, ext 6619 / Merrick Denton-Thompson, ext 6826

EMP&R1203D Ref/Initials/16-Dec-03

Contact: Paul Berryman, ext 6619 / Merrick Denton-Thompson, ext 6826

Section 100 D - Local Government Act 1972 - background papers

The following documents disclose facts or matters on which this report, or an important part of it, is based and has been relied upon to a material extent in the preparation of this report.

NB the list excludes:

1 Published works

2 Documents which disclose exempt or confidential information as defined in the Act

EMP&R1203D Ref/Initials/16-Dec-03

Appendix 1

COUNTY COUNCIL MEETING - 18 SEPTEMBER 2003

NOTICES OF MOTION

1. GM CROPS

Councillor Roberts to move:-

"Hampshire County Council pledges that it will use new European Legislation (Article of EU deliberate Release Directive 2001/18) so that the Council can request the Secretary of State for Agriculture and the European Commission to provide legal protection to prevent particular GM crops from being grown in their area to protect the environment".

2. KEEPING HAMPSHIRE GM FREE

Councillor House to move:-

"This Council recognises:

· that genetic modification of crop plans is a relatively new branch of science and technology;

· that there is still scientific debate about the safety of GM crops; and


· that the commercial growing of GM crops presents legal, economic, social and ethical problems that have not yet been properly addressed.

This Council, therefore, reaffirms its precautionary approach:

· which prevents the use of any detectable amounts of GM ingredients in County Council meals; and

· which includes a clause in all new farm tenancy agreements stipulating that GMOs are not used on County Farms.

This Council declares that, so far as possible, the County Council will work to ensure that Hampshire is kept free of GM crops and feed, that no GM crops are grown on land over which it has control, and asserts a GM-free policy for all goods and services for which the Council is responsible.

This Council also commits to considering each prospective GMO Marketing Consent and, where appropriate, writing to both the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and to the European Commission, requesting that a condition under Article 19 (3) (c) be added to such Marketing Consent so as to exempt Hampshire from the scope of such consent."

Appendix 2

GM Debate Hampshire held on 27 October 2003.

Views of the Expert Panel

Professor Malcolm Grant CBE - Chairman of Agriculture and Environment Biotechnology Commission (AEBC), and of GM Nation Steering Board.

This keynote presentation put the GM debate into an international context, referring to the "curious transatlantic cultural divide" around the GM issue. 90% of soya in USA is GM, whereas no commercial growing of GM crops is allowed in Europe apart from a small crop of GM maize in Spain. The EU regulatory regime was explained. A key point was that if a crop is cleared in any EU country it is automatically cleared for all EU countries. The burden then shifts to individual countries to prove that there is scientific evidence to exclude a GM crop from its country for health or environmental reasons.

The rationale and process for the national GM debate was explained together with key findings. The respondents were generally uneasy about GM. Key worries were about the impacts of GM e.g. on biodiversity, the purity of organic foods and possible production of "superweeds". There was a more open mind about future medical applications. There was a general distrust of the Multinationals and the Government. (40 years ago most scientific crop research was publicly funded in Universities and Research Institutes whereas today most is privately funded particularly by multinational companies).

In summary the public said repeatedly that they wanted more information, more research and more reassurances . Recent food scares such as BSE and Foot & Mouth had caused mistrust surrounding GM. The debate had been welcomed and valued. It was felt that the Government would take on board the findings.

Dr David Carmichael - MD of Battle & Pears Ltd, Member of AEBC, Board Member of British Beet Research Association, Member NFU Biotechnology Working Group.

This speaker was also part of the GM Debate Steering Board. His presentation included many of the advantages of GM and biotechnology in general, particularly to the farming community. A key message was that we should not halt scientific progress based on unfounded fears of new technology.

Brian Johnson - Head of Biotechnology Advisory Unit, English Nature (Taunton), Chair of Consultative Group on International Research, Chair of Biological Safety Panel.

This presentation gave a very balanced view of the pros and cons of GM. The presenter heads the lead agency on GM issues representing statutory conservation organisations in the UK. He had been involved with both the scientific review and the crop trials described in paragraphs 2.2 and 2.4 above. It was argued that technologies were neutral in terms of risk, it is what we do with them that can be dangerous. It was argued that the risks with GM were no bigger than other agricultural risks, just different. He also felt that the regulatory system was effective because some crops are banned and others get limited consent. In conclusion, a case-by-case approach was recommended because some GM crops could be more beneficial to the environment than traditional crops.

Stuart Menzies - Technical Services Manager, Asda Walmart.

This presentation summarised the new labelling regulations described at section 3, and the impact on retailers. No Asda brand foods contain GM ingredients but GM is common in Walmart stores (the USA parent company). The difficulties of traceability and GM testing were described. It was also suggested that providing guaranteed GM-free foods in the future may result in price increases due to all the extra record keeping required. He concluded that Asda policy on GM would be led by consumer demand.

Dr Paul Berryman - Head of Science & Food Standards, Hampshire County Council, Public Analyst & Scientific Adviser to 25 Food Authorities.

This presentation described the County Council's GM related activities since 1990, including its policy on GM-free school meals, joint scientific research on GM testing with Portsmouth University, its Trading Standards role in enforcing GM Food labelling laws and its precautionary approach regarding GM crops on County Council land. It concluded that the County Council would take on board the views expressed at the conference when reviewing its policy on GM.

Pete Riley - Senior Real Food Advisor, Friends of the Earth

This presentation was firmly anti-GM. It argued that recent evidence has proven that our understanding of GM crops and how they affect the environment is too poor to proceed with the commercialisation in the foreseeable future. Issues such as liability, coexistence of crops and purity of seeds were also addressed. The County Council was urged to use Article 19 on a crop by crop basis to deter the growing of GM crops in Hampshire. It was recognised that a blanket ban would not be allowed buy the EU. It concluded that an EU moratorium should remain until effective regulatory systems were in place and that more publicly funded research was needed.

Dr Caroline Lucas MEP - Green MEP for the South East of England, European Parliament Trade and Environment Committees.

This presentation focussed on reasons why the spread of GMO's in Europe should be halted. Problems such as superweeds, harm to wildlife, allergens, antibiotic resistance and food safety were all covered. It was argued that the results of the recent farm scale evaluations (described at Para 2.4) was good enough scientific evidence to reject GM crops in the UK on the grounds of harm to the environment. This rationale had been accepted by EU Commissioner David Byrne. The speaker concluded with a plea for the County Council and individuals to lobby the UK Government accordingly.

Appendix 4

4. Individual Comments

4.1 Comments supporting Precautionary Approach

Congratulations to HCC for organising this conference and capturing such authorative speakers. I concur with the majority of opinions but have very real doubts that there could ever be any reliability/confidence in any traceability system especially where bulk imports are concerned. The paperwork involved seems to be totally unrealistic!

GM products should be kept out of school meals, and products aimed at children. New GM products should not be allowed to be placed in the market place until analytical techniques are in place to detect their use.

Until more research has been done, NO GM crop growing should be allowed.

I still feel very strongly that we do not know enough about the long term effects of GM food. I fear the powers of the multinational companies who are pushing it for commercial gain. The EU should resist pressures from the USA to allow commercial planting of GM foods. I applaud the stance of Hampshire County Council which does not allow GM foods on Council owned land and has banned GM foods in schools etc.

Precautionary etc, but what about more on value of GM for bioremediation etc

Essentially, the GM debate must continue to be a local, County and National focus. We must have independent scientific evidence. Government should influence EU to stop the progress of GM crops in Europe. HCC can establish links at all levels to influence, educate; presenting the evidence so far known. HCC can form improved links and support for those involved in farming in Hants, by expanding `best practice' on their own land. An excellent day which hopefully will extend to a continuary approach to GM and an opportunity for government to review their approach to sustainable farming.

I believe that there should be a strict separation between transgenic vegetable crops and those `straight' crops which do not use genes from say bacteria or animal sources. They should be dealt with separately and not used jointly for obfuscation purposes.

The workshop was too short to cover so many important issues and how best to address the points that arose. Essentially there has been insufficient time and there is too little independent data to give a fully informed decision so the precautionary principle should apply. HCC should remain free of GM until the technology can be contained and is safe to consume.

Very useful and interesting event with a good turnout. Would have liked someone on the panel representing organic farmers ( as raised by a member of the public). I facilitated a workshop, but found there was not sufficient time to discuss the 6 questions in enough detail. Workshop summaries tended to repetition - it would have been more efficient for groups to discuss one or two of the questions in more depth. I think the county council should continue with its precautionary approach, using Article 19 if necessary and objecting individually for GM crops on the basis of potential risk to human health, wildlife and the environment.

I am strongly opposed to the use of GM in food production and believe my views are justified and carefully thought out being an agricultural graduate. I do not believe HCC should give support to the GM cause but should devote its time and resources to the encouragement of local food and organic food. It would be good if school meals could come from the local area for example. And imagine how much less public opposition there would be, than to GM foods!

Maintain the precautionary principle. We appear to have no trustworthy independent science yet and I'm sure we will at some point.

GM food is not the answer to all the problems facing agriculture and the environment. It is only one solution amongst many but it has its place. However, GM technology needs long term trials and much more information before it is used on a large scale in the UK or Europe.

An excellent day which I found extremely useful in explaining the current state of play. I feel we must remember that if introduced, the position will be irreversible and therefore we should take the precautionary approach and invest in `curious research', i.e. publically financed research which is independent. I am opposed to the introduction of commercially grown GM crops at the present time.

I have the opinion that concern over Gm cropped food have been media led by the presentation as a `Frankenstein' product with very shallow arguments for and against. The facts are far more complex than presented in the media and the public doesn't understand the arguments. We have to rely on scientists but they have to be monitored strictly with very tight and challenging questions to have before allowing GM into the food chain. The general public, including me, cannot be relied on to arrive at any sensible conclusion with the material that is, or will be available.

I came with a totally open mind but it was pretty obvious that some of the speakers, particularly the last speaker, who did not. It is not helpful to be harangued when I'm trying to understand.

I do not believe this is an issue for HCC, it is the responsibility of central government and the EU. I am not aware that HCC has the resources and expertise to address any of the GM issues environmental, not food safety. They are complex and their resolutions should not be based on emotion and local politics. I would like to see my council tax spent more sensibly on the real issues a county council should be addressing.

The workshop idea was good, but too many questions and too little time. I suspect the ambience did not understand the agricultural context, as illustrated by some morning questions. The County Council should allow GM, once the national policy confirms this - if national policy is against, HCC should follow that.

4.2. Comments suggesting more Scientific Research needed

An excellent presentation. Perhaps too much squeezes into too short of time - an extra hour might have been useful to possibly draw some conclusions. The issues all complex and much more conclusive information, based on independent science needed to find the way forward with certainty.

Very good. A lot of questions raised in our mind have been confirmed. There is an urgent need for long term testing on all aspects of GM on food and environment. There is a need for some means of disseminating information on this subject without the involvement of media bias (or other extreme views). Many thanks to HCC for arranging this conference.

The main risk I see is only indirectly from GM. The development of GM is very expensive so there will be very strong commercial pressure which will, ensure they (GM plants) are introduced on a very large scale, resist any evidence that might arise if an unforeseen problem. The result is that if we find we have made a mistake we will have made it on a massive scale.

This danger can only be avoided by removing the commercial drive for research, and returning it to more traditional hands. This in turn will only happen (in this field) if patent protection of genetic material is limited to pharmaceuticals.

Much of the resistance to GM foods arises from ignorance (due to lack of information or conflicting information) or prejudice (because it is `new'). There is insufficient authoritive information on the subject to help inform peoples' views. There is, quite rightly, suspicion of information propagated by government because of its reliance on large internationals with vested interest. These should be much more continually financed, independent scientific research into the subject if widespread public acceptance is to be achieved.

Guildhall - was cold otherwise very good. There is a need for more public funded research to give balanced information - needs long term investment.

There is no compelling evidence to show GM is safe in the food chain. It is not known the affect of cross contamination on wildlife and surrounding plant life. It is difficult to test for the unknown. I would urge Hampshire County Council to oppose any introduction of GM foods. Far more research is required.

Disappointed that Hampshire Federation of Woman's Institutes were not invited to attend. Very useful informative day. Pleased Hampshire are GM free and we need lots more research of government expenses - before it is used commercially.

More research. We all need to look at waste and throw away.

More public research assessment funding application.

The sound system within the hall was totally inadequate (AM) as at the back of the hall we had great difficulty hearing morning speakers at the rostrum. Question session from the table was ok. HCC should ensure - through independent sources - that any GM food is 100% safe to use - research funding should come from an independent source rather than multinationals.

Gave me a much greater understanding of GM food and environmental benefits/dis-benefits. I would like to see HCC lobbying the government to fund more research and development of GM crops. Also a greater investment in more field trials and licences for commercial use when there is no evidence to indicate crops are unsafe. HCC should not promote.

Continue the research, keep an open mind, do not restrict the development of certain crops which could be GM as a safe food source.

HCC should; lobby government for independent research, consider case by case ban on GMO's in Hampshire.

More research is needed and letter communications to allow the electorate to make an informed judgement. This country needs to continue unbiased research. There is a large amount of inaccurate information being pedalled by the minority.

Half hour for workshops unrealistically short. Suggested use of government debate material; far too much for half an hour. Better to concentrate on recommendations to HCC. Chairman using roving mike not helpful - chair needs to be on platform. Lots of councillors - where are the general public? Generally GM `just say no'. Need a `neutral' box in feedback form! Hurrah for publicly funded (inc. HCC) research, very precious, must be protected.

Personally I am less concerned about the effect of GM crops ( whether or not processed) on human beings - but I am most concerned of the effect of growing GM crops in British fields, and the effect on other non-GM crops of the same or different species (inc. weeds) - more testing in controlled conditions is required.

4.3. Comments in favour of a GM Free Hampshire

The opening of the debate was welcomed. Concern about conflict within the environment was paramount. The feeling was that once the Pandora's box was opened all control would be lost, therefore keep the lid closed. HCC must maintain a policy of avoiding use of GM and publicly defend this. Uphold article 19.

HCC should support the EU Moratorium on GM commercial approvals until legislation on traceability and labelling; environmental and economic liability. co-existence of GM and non Gm crops; and seed purity are in place and enforceable. Reject applications for commercial approval that fail to provide adequate evidence on risk, support a `zero contamination' threshold for all home grown and imported seeds to protect the environment and maintain disease. Be advised by Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace, declare itself to be GM free and support organic farming instead and ensure its integrity. Hampshire environment is special and might well be damaged by GM this is grounds perhaps with the EU to say no.

Why no member of the organic movement? Everyone wants organic food but it is very expensive to buy it in our area, Gosport.

Hampshire should be GM Free.

Make Hampshire GM Free - We need a bold statement to encourage government to rejuvenate a necessary research programme over sufficient duration (years or decades) before even considering. Allowing Commercialisation of Gm much more research needed on both food safety and environmental grounds. Much better would be to choose and promote a path of alternatives to GM to support. A truly beneficial and sustainable way of producing wholesome food, in harmony with our precious environment.

Promote organic farming instead.

Why was the soil association not represented on the panel (organic involvement) so slightly unbalanced. Hampshire should be GM free.

This was a well meant and well organised occasion but the real issues need sifting in detail. The seminar did not address the knowledge deficit that must have existing in many of the audience. The real issues of GM foods impact on the environment and can only be conveyed by in depth nitty gritty detail. A day of lectures and information on GM technology, the structure of multi nationals and GM and detailed environmental issues is necessary to really get to grips with it. This kind of seminar is basically window dressing. I hope HCC will attempt to establish a GM free zone if arguments can be presented.

Some concern regarding false comparisons in the morning sessions (eg. liking hybridisation and GM - one does occur naturally/one cannot and GM and pharmacology; GM is irreversible in nature if long term effects become apparent). Welcome HCC open debate on the subject and hope that the overwhelming anti-GM views expressed by the delegates is taken into account in the GM free Hampshire Decisions shortly to be made (using article 19). Calibre of the speakers in the main were excellent.

Workshops were good idea, but lack of time for proper structure meant peoples opinions could not be properly drawn out. In my opinion for Britain: there is no need for Gm eg. don't need increased yields, whilst we are paying farmers to set aside. There are too many unquantified risks, I am concerned that Gm is being pushed by commercial companies purely for profit, not for social or environmental gain. I therefore do not believe we should grow GM in this country. HCC should do all in it s power to prevent this.

Use article 19 to exclude crops.

I think HCC should continue with it policy on not having any GM crops grown on HCC land. HCC should press the government to suspend al trials. Press the government to fund research in our universities. Press the government to look at all methods of growing our food. Labelling of food should include maximum thresholds which are much lower than 0.9%. Consumers do not trust the safety of our food at all. Does not mean GM foods are safe even if we can detect them.

Stay GM free and wait for more research.

Well done Hampshire County Council. Much more research is needed to ensure that GM food is safe to eat. Onus should be to prove that is (over long term too) rather than assume that is - I don't want to be part of a mass experiment. I would prefer to eat organic food and urge HCC to ensure that pure organic food is produced and presented in Hampshire and the UK. Make Hampshire GM free - Declare it!

The best informed Gm conference I have been to. Make Hampshire GM free using Article 19.

Much more information required before moving forward. At this time with current information available, I do not believe we should, the government should introduce the growing of GM crops. Please refer to `theme 1' workshop sheet, question 1 - Views against - view one sums up my major concern regarding the environment. Hampshire - A GM Free zone?

I represent the Isle of Wight Council who have confirmed their policy to use all legal means to resist the growing of GM crops on the island and be recognised as a GM free zone. Our arguments are very similar to the ones raised today. Irreversibility of contamination, harm to the environment and biodiversity, unknown health risks, lack of trust in scientific data. Farmers held to ransom by multi-national companies. Eventual herbicide resistance leading to greater use of chemicals. etc etc etc

Well organised with good contributions from well informed speakers. HCC should move forward as soon as possible in declaring itself a GM free zone within the context of EU release directive.

HCC to use article 19 to keep certain GM crops out of Hampshire. Lead by example on owned land and farm sustainably. Share this `best practice' with other land owners in the SE region. Be brave and be a leader on this!

Good that such an event occurred. Workshop too driven by our facilitator ( and his viewpoint) and tried to separate out intrinsically intertwined issues. Good that the issues surrounding modern non GM agriculture were also brought up as causing major environmental damage and loss of biodiversity. Workshops - right size but too short - lengthen and use `snowball' approach? More focus on multinational ownership and political influence, intellectual property rights, biopiracy etc would be helpful. Good to hear that HCC are taking a precautionary approach, Next step could be to support organic agriculture as this is Gm free by definition. Public research needs major re-investment as most is now private/corporate. Good that the need for case by case research and regulation was covered. More on environmentally unstainable agricultural

practice/land management techniques would also be useful/progressive. Push to make Hants GM free through the EU legal requirements for this.

More public/independent funding for bio-research. Feeding the world will not be solved by GM food. That problem will be solved by the removal of economic and political barriers and providing `level playing fields'. This debate has made me want to grow my own vegetables! I have become more anti GM. I would like Hampshire CC to be pro-active towards GM free Foods and local organic produce used in Hampshire organisations. It is very good to know that HCC is doing testing to enforce food labelling laws. please use article 19 make Hampshire a GM free zone.

4.4. Comments in support of GM/ opposed to GM-Free Hampshire

For the sake of the world and our grandchildren we must encourage the introduction and exportation of GMO and stop sitting on the fence.

I would be unhappy a Hampshire resident to see the county become a GM free zone. Would this lead to a future inhibition of trade for Hampshire farmers, business and academic institutes?

Progression should be made within any industry. With regard to GM I feel that HCC should not close the doors on progress. There are no major findings as to health issues as yet and this can only be finalised with the allowance of growing GM crops and continuous scientific evidence being seen. Did we have these concerns when preservatives started appearing in our foods? The world is a place where we have to progress to survive and is the issue of Genetic Modification an issue of needed progression in the food production industry. To look at it another way, We don't want mobile phone masts in our back gardens, but we all want to use our mobile phones!!!

I am positive about the potential of GM, but appalled at how it has been bungled by US commercial exponents! I would be concerned about the implications to my business of making Hampshire a GM free zone, as an animal feed manufacturer who will be forced to have GM products in my factory. US soya is all but committed to GM and Brazil has thrown in the towel (with the exception of the state of Parana). I will have to buy GM because the retailers will run away from paying the high premiums that will inevitably follow.

4.5. General Comments

Well organised, very useful debate, many thanks.

Debate? What Debate! Just a series of lectures.

I thought a good and well balanced panel and debate, therefore excellent day.

It would be very useful to receive a copy of the slides from the presentations.

Would also like to know how HCC intend to enforce the new GM regulations, re: no presence of GM DNA vs testing and traceability, as this is vital to the GM situation going forward.

An interesting and informative day.

Conference mainly concerned with GM environment impact - Little information on the use of GM in food and its safety.

I'm glad that Hampshire is taking a firm stand.

A very informative event, but I am confused as a farmer. I have been led to believe that GM will enhance food production to feed the world but I along with thousands of European farmers are being paid not to grow crops on 10% of our land, are politics getting in the way of progress?

Enjoyed the day very much. All speakers added different views, thank you.

I found the conference most interesting and beneficial. I had no opinions on GM foods either personal or political. Now I have plenty to think about. Perhaps with education it will be in the long term perhaps be the right path to follow. I worry if the UK is really suited to large scale GM food production. Perhaps coupled with a charge method it might succeed.

Well done HCC for raising the debate. I regret that I was not able to attend the whole of the morning session. Much more debate needs to take place to inform the general public.

More time, good to see so many interested parties.