» Environment » GMOs

Why is the UK trying to adopt GM technology when everyone else is trying to get rid of it?

GM in the UK? Great speech, shame about all the lies

The UK’s environment secretary put a stake in the ground saying that GM crops will bring us multiple benefits. Lawrence Wowodward of Citizens Concerned About GM, reviews his performance…

Despite the furore in the “twittersphere” and the activist websites and blogs, Owen Paterson’s speech will probably go unnoticed by most people in the UK. This is as it should be.

The farming and environment minister gave what was supposed be a “game changing” speech promoting an innovative technology that can change the world but like GM it was high on hype and short on substance.

Speaking to a selected audience at Rothamsted Research Owen Paterson finally gave the speech that has been touted around for weeks. He was promoting genetic engineering to an audience who are being paid by the taxpayer to promote genetic engineering.

One definition of a government in trouble is when its ministers have to pay for an audience.

Rothamsted has some good people and some good research but it gave up independent thinking when it employed GMO entrepreneur Maurice Maloney as its director. Now it is clear that their researchers have found their new role in life as a hired audience for spurious bullshit.

To be fair, the speech – at least the text of it – is impressive. It’s a catalogue of half truths, myths and deception with accompanying deceptive references, but nonetheless a good effort. The speechwriter deserves a pay rise – and a spot in the George Orwell Hall of Propaganda.

It will pass by most right thinking people who mistrust politicians, industry, the media and scientists because they know none of these people can be trusted. In any case if they ever think about GMOs they are completely against them and certainly don’t want them anywhere near the food they eat.

Just the ‘facts’?

However Paterson did make some claims and statements that need a response.

He said “the era of complacency about food production must come to an end”.

He is right. Leaving food production to the market and the control of no more than five multi-national corporations is no way to provide food for all equitably and healthily.

He said we must “use all the available tools” in order to feed the world.

He is right. So why does the UK government not fund agro-ecological methods which are recognised by the FAO and others as the best way of feeding hungry people? Why is this tool left in the box and GM over promoted?

He said that 29 countries are growing GM.

He is right but why does he not say that over 40% of GM crops are grown in the US and two countries – Argentina and Brazil make up most of the rest? Why doesn’t he ask why this is?

He said that GM is a success.

He is right – in a few places. But in most places it makes no difference and in some places it has been a social, economic and environmental disaster.

Of course he is not going to say that. Just as he is not going to say that the EU Ombudsmen has recently and repeatedly criticised the EU GM safety regulator as being too close to industry.

Nor is he ever going to say that GM safety assessments are fundamentally flawed and demonstrably so; nor that the health risks are becoming apparent but that government chooses to ignore them.

Of course not; this is a minster and government who thinks that sticking kids up chimneys might be a good youth employment opportunities scheme.

He said that we in the EU are importing and eating masses of GM animal feed – as if this is a cause of celebration from a Conservative minister.

Have we missed something?

Have we missed something? We thought that both parties in this government were for transparency and consumer choice. How can we exercise choice when the facts are hidden from us?

The fact is that this government confuses support for business with the promotion of corporate control.

The fact is that once upon a time we had a free and independent research base but now we have universities and research institutions that are little more than departments of multinational corporations.

Paterson said that GM benefits farmers, consumers and the environment.

His speech laid out that assertion and gave very dubious references to support it.

The UK public, the EU public and increasingly the US public know and are saying this assertion is bullshit.

Translating that into language that Paterson et al can understand requires citizens to act.