Sir, - I would like to correct a number of statements made by Quentin Gargan (October 15th). Mr Gargan's statement that "the EPA cancelled a debate on genetic engineering at short notice" is incorrect.
The EPA strongly believes that there is a need for public information and is fully in favour of public debate on genetic engineering. Because of this the agency organised and advertised a public forum on genetically modified organisms (GMOs) last summer. The EPA was disappointed that it had to postpone the forum because of the court action taken by a member of Mr Gargan's organisation. This was done on legal advice because the issues raised in the court proceedings were sub judice and could not be discussed by the EPA. Therefore it was thought best to defer the debate until all the issues could be aired.
Mr Gargan asserted that there was no public consultation on the sugar beet field trials. This is also an inaccurate statement. Trials such as those are regulated and controlled in accordance with regulations made by the Minister for the Environment and Local Government. These regulations require newspaper advertisements and a time period for public representations. In fact the number and content of the representations received by the EPA in relation to these trials confirmed the need for public information and discussion of the issues involved.
It may be of interest to your readers that the EPA has organised a separate international conference on regulations of GMOs. The purpose of this conference is to promote good regulation because this is necessary for environmental protection and can also lead to increased public confidence.
The agency intends to reschedule the deferred public forum when court proceedings are concluded. - Yours, etc.,
Director, Environmental Protection Agency, Dublin 4.