open i

While there has for some time been near certainty about the eventual outcome of the GM debate, the matter of the timing and the manner of delivery of rather unpopular news by the British government was always in doubt.(525 words)

As consideration by the government of the options on these two matters probably received as much attention as the announcement itself, form was quite as interesting as content.

The first thing that needs to be born in mind is that opposition to genetically modified crops is, in many quarters, absolute and seemingly without condition. With such faith apparent, there was little chance of proving anything, through debate or by way of science. It, therefore, must have been evident that howls of protest could not be avoided.

Conventional wisdom might suggest that such an unpopular decision should be best sprung without warning late on Friday when the press and media were winding down for the weekend, or similarly just in advance of any distracting event. But with seven years in office and five years of experience with this particular issue, the government has probably developed greater sophistication in these matters.

The announcement was made early in the week when journalist were undoubtedly looking for copy and was telegraphed days in advance. The environmental activists, therefore, were given every opportunity to limber up their vocal chords. The announcement could, of course, have been the distraction, either for some other event or detail within the announcement. Or conversely, it could have been an orchestration designed to allow others to contribute.

The other story of the day was the return of five British Guantanamo Bay prisons which was not much of a distraction and might not even have been anticipated. What detail may have been hidden in the statement of the Rt. Hon. Margaret Beckett,the Secretary of State for the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs(DEFRA) to the House of Commons, and missed is also difficult to divine. There seemed to be something in the statement to draw every bodies fire. This itself may have been a victory for the government. While they were condemned by all the usual suspects, there was no uniformity in the condemnation.

If it was a matter of orchestration, two previously loose, but influential, canons on the issue seem to have been secured. The British Medical Association has recently reversed its 1999 policy opposing GM crops which appeared at the time to have been based on a rather superficial review of website information.

In specifically referring to advice from British English Nature, Mrs. Beckett in her statement seemed to have developed some confidence in this quango. British English Nature which "champions the conservation of wildlife, geology and wild places in England," and is funded by DEFRA, has something of a checkered record having at least twice been caught on the wrong side of science on the genetically modified crops issue.

Whatever the strategy on the announcement was, it seems to have worked as after the initial squeals of indignation, everything seems to have gone quite quiet.

March 11, 2004