Open-i.ca Home |
Openi.co.uk Archive |
Open-i.ca Recent Opinion |
About the open i
Anti-GM Activists will persist despite setbacks
-Monday April 18, 2000
British activists' action against genetic engineering in general, and genetically modified(GM) crops in particular, will continue despite a series of setbacks to their cause. As they are unlikely to be convinced that any risk associated with the technology is worth taking, an end to the nonsense is only likely if they are distracted by another cause.
While the main stream British environmental and conservation lobbies are prepared to await the results of the current field scale trials of genetically modified crops in Britain and be guided by the science, the activists are not.
Probably as a result of its past indiscretions, Greenpeace has had a conspicuous lack of success in persuading farmers hosting the field scale trials to give up on them. That it has only managed to persuade three of thirty odd to quit must be regarded as a rebuff for a deep pocketed multi national organization.
The well orchestrated attempt by the Friends of the Earth to raise farmers' concerns about potential liability resulting from genetic "contamination" has also failed to gain significant support. Proposed legislation relating to this issue has been dropped by both the British and European parliaments.
Twenty-eight members of Greenpeace are currently standing trial for trashing a GM maize crop last July. The charges are criminal damage and theft. The defense is "lawful excuse." As hollow as this sounds, it does give Greenpeace lots of opportunity to expound its views.
The press, attentive for a couple of days, has, however, found more newsworthy items. These include, incidently, a murder trial in the same court house of a farmers who dispatched a burglar last August in an area where, and at a time when, rural crime was a major issue.
Why the anti GM activists have failed to attract the attention and sympathy of the public at large is becoming increasingly apparent. Consumer concern about genetically modified foods is supposed to be widespread. Hence, it would reasonable to expect public sympathy.
What may be different about this campaign is that it is not aimed at a multinational corporate target. The actions of the activists, with money to burn on public relations and legal services, against farmers may be increasingly viewed as bullying.
This, however, is likely to be of little concern to the activists, who will almost certainly continue to demonstrate as the trial crops develop and are harvested, unless, of course, they find a softer touch.
April 18, 2000