The need for public invovlement in decision making
Meaningful public participation needs 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. This has not been the case with GM food and crops.
- Public opinion polls consistently show deep concern about GM food in our diet and the impact of GM crops on the environment, yet they have been introduced without adequate public consultation.
- The Government says it recognises the need for greater public involvement in overseeing developments in biotechnology, but it is still lacking, and the UK consistently votes in favour of GMO authorisations in Europe against the wishes of the majority of citizens.
- The 2003 Government-funded GM Nation? public debate revealed many pressing and detailed concerns, yet afterwards the Government attempted to authorise cultivation of a GM maize. This was blocked by Scotalnd and Wales before it got to seed listing stage, then Bayer withdrew it from the market.
Public participation based on solid information
- Genuine public participation would give people the opportunity to consider if there is any need for GM and to assess other options.
- A broad range of methods could be used to secure public input, including citizens' juries, multi-criteria evaluation, co-operative discourse, focus groups and opinion polls. These approaches could identify concerns, criteria by which GM should be judged, measure the consequences of different policy options and initiate a debate about them.
- Meaningful participation in these processes requires public access to information about all the potential effects of GM food and crops, as well as the alternatives.
Summary
In order to ensure genuine public involvement in decidions about GM food and crops there must be:
- Meaningful public participation at local, regional & national levels.
- Thorough consideration of alternatives.
- Government commitment to respecting and implementing the outcomes.