• Public opinion polls show deep concerns about genetically modified foods in our diet and the impact of GM crops on the environment. Yet they have been introduced without adequate public consultation to address these concerns .
• The Government has recognised the need for greater public involvement in overseeing developments in biotechnology . However genuine public participation requires that people are given the opportunity to consider whether or not there is any need for genetic modification in farming and food and to assess this against other options.

Public Participation techniques

• For public participation to be meaningful there must be Government commitment to implement the outcome. It must be conducted at local, regional and national levels, be well funded and have access to appropriate expertise. So far this has not always been the case. Following the Government funded GM Nation? Public Debate in 2003 which revealed many concerns, the Government announced the go ahead for GM maize to be grown. They did this without first dealing with the many problems, such as guaranteed seed purity, contamination, and liability for harm.
• A broad range of methods could be used, including citizens' juries, multi-criteria evaluation, co-operative discourse, focus groups, and opinion polls . These approaches would be used to identify concerns and criteria by which genetic modification should be judged, identify and measure the consequences of different policy options, and initiate a debate about the options.
• To participate in these processes people will need access to information about all the potential effects of GM food and crops and about the alternatives. A freeze will allow adequate time to establish and test these processes.

Summary

In order to ensure genuine public involvement there must be:

• Continuing public participation at local, regional & national levels
• Thorough consideration of alternatives to genetic modification
• Commitment to implementing the outcome of public participations