Opponents of GM foods walk out of consultation talks with Government

The Government's consultation process on genetically-modified foods has been derailed by the withdrawal of 19 organisations, all opponents of the way GM foods are being introduced to Ireland.

The process, which was being overseen by the Minister for the Environment, Mr Dempsey, is nonetheless due to resume today. The second day's debate will be chaired by a four-member independent panel headed by Dr Turlough O'Donnell QC.

At a press conference yesterday to announce their decision, the NGOs were highly critical of Mr Dempsey's ruling out consideration of the possibility of an Irish moratorium on the development and release of genetically-modified organisms (GMOs) into the environment. This was indicated by the Minister immediately before the first day's agenda-setting debate last week.

The Minister said last night, however, that he would continue the process by holding the second-stage debate even if the NGOs were not represented. He noted with regret "the 11th-hour decision to withdraw."

He has asked the independent panel to continue the consultation process and prepare its report, "having regard to the written submissions of the organisations involved". Such an independent report would provide "a valuable contribution" to his review of environmental policy in "this sensitive and rapidly developing area".

The NGOs' spokeswoman, Ms Iva Pocock of the Voice environmental group, said they were led to believe the debates were about GMOs and the environment.

But the second day's debate was broadened and had, for example, included economic issues but not health concerns on the agenda, she said. Because of these "and other valid reasons", the "unfortunate decision" to withdraw was taken. "He ruled out a key issue which NGOs wanted to debate."

The Genetic Concern spokesman, Mr Quentin Gargan, said environmental issues had been restricted unduly, while concerns about the health impact of GM foods, which were to be spelt out by the renowned geneticist, Prof Joe Cummins of the University of Western Ontario, were not being given a full airing.

The alliance includes environmentalists, organic farmers, wildlife groups and doctors.

However, Compassion in World Farming and the Irish Anti-Vivisection Society said they would continue to participate "as we must take every opportunity, however limited, to raise the serious animal welfare implications of farm animal genetic engineering." They believed, however, that the process was seriously flawed.

Ms Kathryn Raleigh of IBEC's Food and Drink Federation said the withdrawal was very disappointing. She believed the agenda, while it had gone beyond environmental issues, had included consumer concerns that had been raised by the NGOs.

The director of the Irish Bio-industry Association, Mr Matt Moran, who represented biotech companies at the debates, said he was deeply saddened and disappointed. He felt the first debate had been balanced and comprehensive, and today's agenda had covered all relevant issues.

The biotech company Monsanto strongly criticised the withdrawal. Its business manager for Ireland, Dr Patrick O'Reilly, said it was "inexplicable given the clear terms of reference agreed by all sides, the productive outcome of the first meeting and the importance of the issue for consumers, the economy and the environment in Ireland."

He added: "Those opposed to GM technology need to explain why they have sought to sabotage the debate in this manner, especially since the items on the agenda are the ones they wanted discussed. The truth would appear to lie more in the fact they are losing the argument and hence their aversion to critical analysis."