open i

A year ago the British government’s science-based policy on genetically modified crops looked doomed. But the political landscape has changed and it no longer looks threatened by political expediency during the general election campaign.(750 words)

A year ago it seemed that the British government’s science-based policy on genetically modified crops was doomed. The only question was when the general election would be called and when the activists would be able to press their advantage as the government sought to squeeze extra votes out of the electorate.

A year later and as the election is upon us the political landscape has changed, if not dramatically, enough seemingly to stall the anti biotech lobby.

Autumn 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. And in recent months demonstrations have generally either failed to attract press and media coverage or have been very limited in their number and scope.

This raises the question as to why the anti-biotech activists have been so quiet in Britain if not elsewhere. As the imminent general election campaign will be pivotal for the political future of genetically modified crops, there are more than a few farmers holding their breath.

At this time last year the trial of the Greenpeace 28 accused of theft and criminal damage of a genetically modified maize crop the previous year held the attention of the national media. So the winter rapeseed crop was not required as a target. But over the winter months and so far this spring the activists have provided very thin pickings for the media in Britain.

And perhaps as a result supermarket support for the cause also seems to be fading with the promotion of naturally produced food appearing 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 activists failed to find any fault with the technology.

Believing that the escape of pollen from flowering crops puts the British country side at risk to genetic pollution, the eco-warriors tend to strike just before a crop flowers. As winter seeded rapeseed flowers in April, it is a natural first target.

As the anti-biotech activists have in the past been particularly successful in Britain in igniting and fuelling interest in their cause, it would be significant if they lost their touch on the eve of their time of greatest opportunity - the general election campaign.

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. The British public are still uncertain about the technology.

There are several possible explanations for the apparent inaction by the activists, the inclement weather and the awareness that winter rapeseed flowers this early aside.

They 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, hopefully, the weather will have improved, 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.

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

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 sympathy by the public.

A host of other issues on the political agenda now out rate genetic engineering. And, if the polls are any indication, the government will not be looking for issues to squeeze extra votes from the electorate at the eleventh hour. The anti biotech lobby is certainly faced with a challenging row to hoe. And it is likely to have a long wait for the next convenient ambush opportunity.

May 8, 2001