Britain has approved its first genetically modified crop for commercial growing, but rejected two others.
The issue has been highly controversial and the government鈥檚 decision has been denounced by environmental groups but welcomed by the biotechnology industry and many scientists.
The announcement represents a further crumbling of the unofficial moratorium established by the European Union in 1998 which has prevented farmers growing GM crops.
Advertisement
鈥淭here is no scientific case for a blanket approval of all the uses of GM,鈥� said Britain鈥檚 environment secretary Margaret Beckett on Tuesday, reporting her decision to parliament. 鈥淏ut equally, there is no scientific case for a blanket ban on the use of genetic modification.鈥�
However, bureaucratic obstacles will prevent farmers from growing the approved GM maize, for use as animal feed, until at least 2005.
Powerful weedkiller
The newly approved crop is Bayer鈥檚 Chardon LL maize, which has been engineered to be resistant to the weedkiller glufosinate ammonium. In the British government鈥檚 mammoth three year 鈥渇arm-scale evaluations鈥� (FSE), the GM maize turned out to be better for farmland wildlife than conventional maize treated with the powerful weedkiller atrazine.
But the FSEs also found that two other weedkiller-resistant GM crops were worse for the environment than their conventional counterparts and Beckett decided to reject approval for both of them.
鈥淭he UK should oppose the commercial cultivation of the relevant varieties of GM beet and oilseed rape anywhere in the EU using the [weedkiller] management regime tested in the FSEs,鈥� said Beckett.
Even the maize decision came with conditions attached, because in the FSEs it was compared with conventional maize treated with atrazine, a powerful weedkiller that will be phased out in the EU by 2006. Critics said the comparison was therefore invalid.
Beckett took account of this in her decision. First, farmers can only grow Chardon LL provided they stick to the regime used in the FSEs. Second, the approval she gave expires in October 2006. If Bayer wants to reapply, it will have to supply new data showing that the GM maize is more beneficial for the environment than conventional crops treated with the replacements for atrazine.
GM-free zones
Beckett doubts whether farmers will be able to plant the maize till 2005 because it needs to be officially listed as a crop variety, and the glufosinate ammonium must be listed as a herbicide.
The listing could cause problems because devolved governments of Scotland and Wales 鈥� which both want to establish 鈥淕M-free鈥� zones 鈥� must also agree to it. The government is hoping to persuade them to do so in return for agreeing that voluntary GM zones can be set up.
The delay will also give the government time to work out the statutory distances required between fields to prevent cross contamination from GM to non-GM crops. Beckett also said that the industry 鈥� not farmers or the government 鈥� should fund any schemes to compensate farmers whose crops are contaminated.
Opponents of GM were dismayed by Beckett鈥檚 decision. 鈥淭he government is behaving very arrogantly with GM crops,鈥� says Sue Mayer of the campaign group GeneWatch UK. 鈥淭hey claim to be taking a scientific approach, but have closed their eyes to the limitations of our knowledge.鈥�
But the industry welcomed the announcement. 鈥淚t鈥檚 a victory for sound science and freedom of choice,鈥� said Bob Fiddaman of the Supply Chain Initiative on Modified Agricultural Crops (SCIMAC), an alliance of agro-biotech companies.
The British Medical Association also backed Beckett鈥檚 decision while releasing its own, updated policy on GM foods. It reversed its previous policy of an 鈥渙pen ended moratorium鈥� on GM crops, saying now that each crop should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. But it also called for post-market surveillance to spot any emerging health problems 鈥� or benefits 鈥� once people start eating GM produce more extensively.
