Cabinet decision over GM maize provokes anger from environmental campaigners

GM crops are expected to be grown commercially in Britain as early as next spring after the Cabinet yesterday approved the planting of genetically-modified maize.

The news brought angry protests from environmental pressure groups which have opposed GM crops on the grounds that they may harm the environment.

Members of the Cabinet approved the planting of the first GM crop in Britain after Margaret Beckett, the Environment Secretary, made a case for giving the go-ahead for a strain of GM maize to be grown under strict controls.

Downing Street indicated yesterday that the Cabinet had accepted her proposal after "the importance of the primacy of science" was underlined. Although Tony Blair, who was in Italy, was absent from the cabinet meeting, a formal announcement to MPs on the decision is to be made by Mrs Beckett next week.

But a senior Conservative MP expressed anger that the Government had made the decision ahead of the publication of a report on GM crops today.

Peter Ainsworth, chairman of the Environmental Audit Select Committee, is to write to Mrs Beckett accusing her of bypassing House of Commons protocol by taking a decision before the publication of the report by his committee. Thisis expected to be highly critical of the GM farm-scale trials, which provided evidence for the Government's decision. "For decisions of substance to be taken before our conclusions are decided would be a discourtesy to the House," he said.

Mrs Beckett is expected to tell MPs next week that the Government will give the green light for GM maize to be grown, subject to approval of the seed and pesticide that would be used. Yesterday sources close to Mrs Beckett said the approvals would not be granted in time for this year's planting, but the crop could be grown next spring.

The decision to allow the planting of a GM maize produced by the German chemicals giant Bayer has been taken in spite of a series of reports produced by the Government itself last summer which showed serious economic and scientific problems with GM, and very substantial public hostility.

It has been driven by Mr Blair's known personal enthusiasm for the technology - thought to date from a late 1990s meeting with Bill Clinton - which has been strongly supported by Mrs Beckett.

Two weeks ago leaked minutes of a cabinet committee showed that Mrs Beckett and her colleagues intended pressing ahead with commercialisation despite the acknowledged public opposition which, ministers thought, might be "worn down" by a determined campaign of argument backed by leading pro-GM scientists.

Officials of the Department of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) were dismayed that the news had emerged ahead of their carefully planned announcement. But green groups were dismayed by the decision.

"Tony Blair has today picked a fight with the British people," said Sarah North, a Greenpeace campaigner. "Once again he's pushing a pet project in spite of the evidence. There are thousands of people ready to fight this decision in the fields, the streets, the courts and the supermarkets."

Sue Mayer, director of the pressure group Genewatch, said there was no public mandate to go ahead with growing GM crops in Britain. "The Government doesn't seem to realise that if they go ahead and something goes wrong, they will be in deep, deep hot water," she said.

Defra officials would make no comment yesterday, other than to say that a statement on GM policy was "expected next week". But it is well-known that the GM plant under consideration as the first candidate for commercial growth in Britain is a maize to be used as cattle fodder, technical name Chardon LL T25. This has been genetically engineered by Bayer to be tolerant of a powerful herbicide called Liberty (scientific name glufosinate ammonium). All of the GM crops which have been proposed for commercial growth in Britain are modified to be herbicide-tolerant, and it is this that has caused the controversy - because the extra-powerful weedkillers they can withstand are seen as a further threat to farmland wildlife, which has been severely depleted by intensive farming over the past 40 years.

In 1998 the Government persuaded the GM companies to take part in a moratorium on commercial growth while farm-scale trials were carried out on the GM crops in line for British planting. The trials showed that growing two of the crops, beet and oilseed rape, was more harmful to the environment than growing their conventional equivalents. However, using Liberty weedkiller with Chardon maize was shown to be less harmful to biodiversity than growing conventional maize.

GM opponents immediately objected that this was because the conventional herbicide was Atrazine, a weedkiller so powerful that it is being phased out. Nevertheless, the Government is expected to indicate next week that on the basis of the trials the Bayer maize will be given approval.

Its basic authorisation, which is done on a Europe-wide basis, had already been granted in Brussels in 1998 before the moratorium. It now needs approval for its weedkiller from the Pesticides Safety Directorate, and an entry on the official UK list of approved seeds. The latter also has to be agreed by the devolved administrations of Scotland and Wales.

It will not be clear until next week exactly what conditions the Government has placed on the growing of the GM maize. The most pressing question will be that of "co-existence and liability" - how the maize can be planted without contaminating organic maize and, if it does, who pays for the damage.

KEY REPORTS THAT HIGHLIGHTED GM FLAWS

Economic costs and benefits of GM: July 2003

The benefits are likely to be limited, a study by the strategy unit of the Cabinet Office said. Only a narrow range of existing GM crops was suited to British conditions, and the demand for any GM products, and therefore their value, was likely to be small. It said any "small-scale" benefits are likely to be outweighed by developments such as changes to the EU's Common Agricultural Policy.

Science of GM: July 2003

The most serious potential harm from growing genetically modified crops in Britain was their effect on farmland wildlife, a government review of GM science said. The panel of 24 scientists and policy advisers led by the Government's chief scientific adviser, Professor Sir David King, dismissed fears of food safety, but highlighted environmental concerns. But it emphasised the risks to wildlife from extra-powerful weedkillers.

GM Nation, the GM Debate: September 2003

Britons do not want genetically modified crops and food, the national GM debate concluded. The debate involved 675 public meetings and 36,000 written responses. GM-hostile majorities were enormous, with 85 per cent saying GM crops would aid producers not people, 86 per cent were unhappy to eat GM food and 91 per cent feared GM effects on the environment.

The Farm-Scale Evaluations: October 2003

British scientists showed GM crops could harm the environment. The three-year exercise, set up by the Government and known as the Farm-Scale Evaluations (FSEs), compared what happened to wildlife and found that the powerful weedkillers used seriously depleted plants, seeds and insects such as bees and butterflies. One weedkiller was so toxic it is banned in Europe.