Group to seek judicial review of EPA's decision

THE legal challenge to plans by the US multinational, Monsanto, to grow genetically-engineered sugar beet in Carlow was of little…

THE legal challenge to plans by the US multinational, Monsanto, to grow genetically-engineered sugar beet in Carlow was of little significance in the brave new world of genetically-modified organisms (GMOs). It was, however, immensely significant within the Irish context.

The Monsanto application to grow beet containing GMOs on a trial basis was the first attempt to bring that new world to the Irish environment. Moreover, it represented a questioning of the Environmental Protection Agency's decision-making process. It is an EU-designated authority to decide on Irish GMO applications.

GMOs are bacteria, viruses, fungi, plants and animals in which genetic material has been altered in a way that does not occur naturally. Scientists can read gene codes, replicate them and then have them incorporated into other organisms.

Hence the ability to produce crops resistant to insecticides or, for example, tomatoes resistant to plant viruses. The list of genetically-modified products grows almost on a weekly basis. GMO industry has been facilitated by the EU, though consumer concern about GMO products is considerable and largely unappeased.

READ MORE

The failure of a member of Genetic Concern to secure an injunction means that the company can proceed with planting beet genetically-engineered to withstand Monsanto's own hugely successful herbicide, Roundup, on less than half an acre of land owned by Teagasc in Oakpark, Carlow. That commercial emphasis is not highlighted by Monsanto - its agricultural products generated a record $3 billion (£1.98 billion) in 1996, mainly due to Roundup.

It preferred to stress the decision meant growers would be able to significantly reduce total herbicide applications. "These plants offer very significant benefits for the environment and for all our consumers who care about it," according to Monsanto's Irish business manager, Mr Sydney Reid.

Monsanto extensively evaluates its products' suitability to a variety of environments. It has conducted 150 beet trials at various locations including eight EU countries. But it is likely that the Irish exercise is also an attempt to desensitise public attitudes towards GMOs.

This, however, has not convinced Genetic Concern. It confirmed that there would now be a judicial review of the EPA decision to grant Monsanto permission. It is likely to go to a hearing before July. Ms Clare Watson, who brought the initial action, said that seeking an injunction was "the first step of a process, and the hardest step of all".

For the injunction to succeed, she had to prove that the beet represented a serious personal risk to herself. "I could not say I was going to drop dead tomorrow because of this. Our concerns are more long-term. We are not downhearted by the outcome. We are fairly confident that on extended grounds, through the judicial review process, that we will get a full hearing."

Genetic Concern claims that genetic engineering is an untried science; that the length of time that GMOs are in the environment does not give a full indication of possible effects. BSE has taught the world of the implications of feeding bone meal to cattle. That, and other environmental disasters centring around food, warrant caution, it said.

The EPA when granting Monsanto's application accepted "there is widespread concern about GMO use" but found that beet trials had shown "no adverse effects". Moreover, it added: "The development and use of genetic engineering techniques has many benefits. For example, in food processing, pharmaceuticals, environmental clean-up as well as agriculture."

It has, however, postponed a seminar on GMOs due to be staged in June because of the legal action.

Cork Environmental Alliance expressed disappointment at the court outcome. "This is very bad news for Irish food producers and consumers," its spokesman, Mr Derry Chambers, said.

Fianna Fail environment spokesman, Mr Noel Dempsey, called on the Government to stop the planting by exercising powers granted under the EPA Act. "This crop, once planted, will have an unknown ecological effect that can never be undone," he claimed.