GE lessons from Britain - 9

by

CARROLL DU CHATEAU

OPTIONS FOR NEW ZEALAND

"Don’t Treat the customer like a dummy – remember, she’s your wife."

60s advertising mogul, David Ogilvy

The most salutory lesson that New Zealand can learn from the British experience is not to under-estimate the public. It is now clear that only an educated, informed and safety-satisfied public is likely to get alongside the latest biotechnology.

And stepping up toxicological testing procedure will be part of that process. Even the US biotech industry is now asking for more rigorous food safety testing procedures. Says US Genetics professor Julian Schroeder, “The industry is asking for this to put some confidence in the consumer.”(48)

As Jonathan Freedland pointed out in The Guardian, June 9, 1999, people are no longer confident in scientific judgement or attitudes to risk. “A shift in opinion is knocking science off its pedestal…The days have just gone when experts could go ahead and make decisions without reference to the wider public".

It would also be unwise to underestimate the motives of big business. Alan Ryan of New College Oxford, who chaired the Nuffield Foundation inquiry into GM foods (which incidentally, came out in enthusiastic support of them) says it must not be left to the market to pioneer genetic modification of food for developing countries.

Instead he says, Western governments need to get involved. “One of the effects of privatisation is that there are no longer publicly-funded plant-breeding centres in this country…Up until now GM crops have produced very little for the consumer and nothing for developing countries. Slightly superior tomato puree is not a tremendous advance.”

Some countries, the Netherlands and Norway particularly, have adopted their own standards for the introduction of GM.

For example, Norway, has a restrictive policy on genetic modification, focusing on ethics and safety to health and the environment. Despite EU directives Norway has side-stepped the obligation to take GM foods because it contravenes Norwegian legislation.

Thus five EU-approved GM products (two animal vaccines – against pseudorabies in pigs and rabies neither of which are found in Norway – and three GM crops, maize, rape and chicory,) are not allowed on the Norwegian market.(49)

However, for New Zealand – a country that prides itself on taking bold options - the over-riding factor is that, within a few years, this technology has the power to do anything – both save and destroy the planet.

The real task now is to pour research effort into GM products that will add value for consumers. With the right technology and enough controls to inspire public confidence, we can move ahead.

Advises Harry Griffin, those who win in the next round of GM goods will be those who work out what consumers want so badly it will counteract any concerns they feel – then give it to them. They’ll also have to get their sums right.

Notes Griffin, margins in animal production at least are so skinny that any new genetic modifications will have to be highly effective – and attractive to consumers.

He smiles wryly. “The chef has so much more impact.”

Footnotes:

Read the rest of this report:

1

|

2

|

3

|

4

|

5

|

6

|

7

|

8

| 9 |

10

GE links

GE glossary

GE discussion groups