Those wishing to introduce genetically modified crops to Ireland have an obligation to show the technology is safe, according to the environmental group, Genetic Concern. While a licence for the first trial of genetically modified sugar beet was granted by the Environmental Protection Agency to the US multinational Monsanto, Genetic Concern believed that all safety issues had still not been addressed, the group's spokesman Mr Quentin Gargan said.
At a press conference in Dublin, he said the EPA had looked in the wrong places in reaching its decision and was in the unfortunate position of having to rely heavily on Monsanto's own research findings. When it was pointed out that this practice was the norm in environment-related industry, Mr Gargan said the technology was so new, it required "more extensive checks and balances".
He confirmed that the group was compiling evidence in advance of a judicial review of the EPA decision starting on December 10th. "We hope the court case will put it up to Monsanto and the EPA to prove it's safe, and not up to us to show that it's dangerous. We do not have the resources but we have concerns that are not answered."
Their main concerns, he said, related to what was known as "horizontal gene flow". The technology in their view meant "species barriers are broken down", raising the possibility that introducing additional genetic material to one species may impact on others in the wild, or in soils.
Environmental impact statements on the technology were notable for their lack of examination in the form of soil analysis and, in particular, study of cross pollination. "The technology promotes the possibility of that happening by weakening a plant's own resistance to gene transfer."
Monsanto has repeatedly insisted that research has demonstrated that gene transfer from species that it is using - such as herbicide-resistant beet - is not a risk to other species or to biodiversity.
Genetic Concern, however, said this issue had not been fully addressed. They had also reservations about the technology's impact when such products come into the food chain.
Industry had invested so much in biotechnology that it wanted to believe that it works, Mr Gargan said. But this smacked of the British government attitude to BSE, when "it wanted to believe indications from its scientists that it did not represent a risk to humans".
It was their view that regulatory authorities in the US were speaking on a united front with industry on this biotechnology as they wanted to break into the European market. This was hugely important from a trade perspective for the US, he said.
Suggestions that Genetic Concern formed part of the operation to destroy Monsanto's trial site in Carlow recently or knew who was responsible were outrageous, Mr Gargan added.
As it was admitted that resistance to herbicide would eventually occur in plants, this would inevitably lead to more herbicide use in the long term rather than less as was being claimed by chemical companies, he said.
