GM crops are good for us

GM crops are good for us

22 Jan 2004

The panel debate the motion: GM crops are good for us. Chaired by Peter Sissons.

Arguing for the motion are Vivian Moses, Kerry Preete and Conrad Lichtenstein.

Vivian Moses looks primarily at the science behind genetically modified crops. He notes that all selective breeding throughout history has been based on genetic engineering, and that all food has resulted from human intervention. Moses demands that we look closer at the facts, and the overwhelmingly positive reactions from farmers and prestigious organisations around the world.

Kerry Preete explains how all farmers, no matter location or crop, face similar choices from environmental, technological, and financial challenges. Biotech crops help farmers face these problems and farm more efficiently.

Conrad Lichtenstein explains how the European GM debate is an example of an inversion of the enlightenment proposition – that human reason would triumph over superstition, ignorance, fear and tyranny. Anxiety over GM has proliferated and, whilst rumours are rife, they are untrue.

Arguing against the motion are Sue Mayer, Michael Meacher and Devinder Sharma.

Sue Mayer looks at the history of agricultural policy direction, one which is driven by the biotechnology industry. The intention of GM, according to Mayer is little more than to accumulate capital, the result of which will lead to a bleak future in agriculture.

Michael Meacher states that he is not convinced by the research that surrounds GM foods and farming. He believes many more years of testing are necessary before it is safe to integrate GM farming into agriculture. GM products have no direct benefits for consumer, and the long-term effects of ingesting them have not been clarified.

Devinder Sharma explains that the concern of scientists in eliminating hunger in the developing world is limited to the profits of private companies. The poverty of Indian farmers is not due to inefficient farmers but the ill-thought out subsidies which encourage the unnecessary GM process.

First vote: 115 For, 172 Against, 89 Don’t know

Final vote: 136 For, 212 Against, 22 Don’t know

The motion is defeated by 76 votes.

BUY THE DVD