British public rejects GM technology

By MICHAEL McCARTHY in London

The title of the debate was "GM Nation?" But that is precisely what the British do not want their country to be, according to the official report from the national consultation on GM crops and food presented to the Government yesterday.

The unprecedented test of public opinion, involving 675 public meetings and more than 36,000 written responses over six weeks this summer, revealed a deep hostility towards GM technology across the population.

Alongside fears that GM crops and food could be harmful to human health and the environment, the debate threw up widespread mistrust and suspicion of the motives of those taking decisions about GM - especially the Government and multinational companies, such as Monsanto.

GM-hostile majorities were enormous, 85 per cent saying GM crops would benefit producers not ordinary people, 86 per cent saying they were unhappy with the idea of eating GM food, 91 per cent saying they thought GM had potential negative environmental effects and no fewer than 93 per cent of respondents saying they thought GM technology was driven more by the pursuit of profit than public interest.

Figures in support of GM were, by contrast, tiny.

Even special focus groups, deliberately selected from people who were uncommitted one way or another in order to tease out the views of the "silent majority", opposed GM more the more they learned about it, the report discloses.

The extent and the unequivocal nature of the hostility revealed by "GM Nation?" will represent a substantial political hurdle to those who wish to bring the technology to Britain as soon as possible - led by Tony Blair and his Environment Secretary, Margaret Beckett, and giant agribusiness companies such as Monsanto and Bayer.

Yesterday Beckett reaffirmed a promise that the Government would "listen" to the views the debate has highlighted and respond to them publicly.

But listening alone would not do, said green groups.

"The Government will ignore this report at its peril," said Pete Riley, the GM campaigner for Friends of the Earth.

"The public has made it clear that it doesn't want GM food and it doesn't want GM crops. There must not be any more weasel words from the Government on this issue."

However, the umbrella body for the GM companies in Britain, the Agricultural Biotechnology Council, rejected the report's findings, saying that "public meetings do not equal public opinion".

Criticising the debate's methodology, the ABC claimed that nearly 80 per cent of the debate response forms "can be clearly identified by cluster analysis as being orchestrated by campaigning groups". But the chairman of the debate, Professor Malcolm Grant, rejected that.

"GM Nation?" follows two other GM reports commissioned by ministers and published in July. One final report is now due before the Government decides on whether to give the go-ahead to the commercial growth of GM crops in Britain.

The final report examines farm-scale evaluations of GM crops, a four-year trial designed to see whether deadlier weedkillers used with them cause new harm to the environment.

Published on October 16, it will be crucial because the decision to go ahead is taken by the EU in Brussels, and the only way the Government can countermand it is by finding new evidence of harm to human health or the environment from GM technology - such as crop trials may provide.

- INDEPENDENT