open i

The anti biotech lobby appears poorly prepared for the imminent British general elcetion with its activists seeming to have taken a break from their genetically modified crop demonstrations. (590 words)

Winter seeded rapeseed in Britain including genetically modified crops which are part of farm scale environmental trials have flowered without attracting the attention of the eco-warriors. This raises the question as to why the activists have been so quiet in Britain in recent months.

At this time last year the trial of the Greenpeace 28 accused of theft and criminal damage of a GM maize crop the previous year held the attention of the press. So the winter rapeseed crop was not required as a target. But over the winter months the activists have also provided much thinner pickings for the media in Britain, if not elsewhere, than they did a year ago.

And perhaps as a result supermarket support for the cause also seems to be fading. While some chains are promoting meat and meat products produced with GM-free feed, generally the promotion of naturally produced food appears to have yielded centre stage to healthy food.

Further the new British Food Standards Agency, which has had a very active first year with many other food issues, has to the chagrin of anti-biotech lobby failed to find any fault with the technology.

While the activists have in the past been particularly successful in igniting and fuelling interest in their cause, they seem either to be losing their touch, or taking a break.

There are several possible explanations for this. They may regard the weather as too inclement for demonstrations in the great outdoors. Or they may not be aware that winter rapeseed flowers this early

More likely, however, activists may figure that, with the press and media well and truly focussed on the foot and mouth outbreak, they would not attract sufficient attention to warrant action. And indeed such traffic in the countryside might have even attracted adverse publicity with the potential for spreading the disease.

Demonstration can, of course, be deferred until spring seeded rapeseed flowers or maize tassels later in the year by which time the weather will have improved hopefully, the foot and mouth outbreak will have died away, and the press will be looking for copy.

The challenge for the bio activists, however, is that like even the most successful brands of soap powder, their cause may be soon forgotten if not actively promoted.

As in the past the cause has had a particular challenge in recruiting front line warriors and preparation for the summer season must surely be under way, lack of publicity at this time must be a concern for them.

Students who might other wise be willing to devote their summer to the cause may instead be tempted to accept parental invitations for a family holiday in Tuscany, or whichever summer destination is in vogue.

Another possible explanation is that of a planned break. The activists may have a program scheduled to coincide with the impending British general election. As the election was deferred because of concerns over spreading foot and mouth, so their activities may have been put on hold.

If they are able to sustain an effective publicity campaign during the election, it is, of course, just possible that they will be able to shake the government from its science-based policy.

We may indeed be experiencing the quiet before the storm. But, if the storm passes without serious damage, weather concerns will fade. With the declining interest of supermarkets and increasing evidence that the environment is not at serious risk to genetically modified crops, demonstrations are likely to be viewed with increasing distain by the public.

May 4, 2001