Support our mission to provide fearless stories about and outside the media system
Packed with exclusive investigations, analysis, and features
SUBSCRIBE TODAY
The UK is poised to open up its borders and supermarket shelves to new forms of genetically-engineered ‘precision bred’ organisms. But there is confusion among key decision-makers about how it will work – and whether the safeguards are strong enough.
The Genetic Technology (Precision Breeding) Act became law in March 2023 and Labour has now laid down the regulations which will bring it into force in November.
It is set to allow genetically-altered food to hit UK supermarket shelves as soon as 2026. The products are described as ‘precision bred’ rather than ‘genetically modified’ as they must be found to contain genetic features which could have – theoretically – been produced by traditional breeding processes, even if there are thousands of genetic variations inserted into the products in the lab.
Leonie Nimmo, Executive Director at GM Freeze, an anti-genetic modification campaign which pushes for a “safe, fair and sustainable” food system, attended the latest meeting this month of ACRE – the Advisory Committee on Releases to the Environment – which decides on the “precision bred” status of organisms now that the law underpinning it has passed.
ENJOYING THIS ARTICLE? HELP US TO PRODUCE MORE
Receive the monthly Byline Times newspaper and help to support fearless, independent journalism that breaks stories, shapes the agenda and holds power to account.
PAY ANNUALLY – £39.50 A YEAR
PAY MONTHLY – £3.75 A MONTH
MORE OPTIONS
We’re not funded by a billionaire oligarch or an offshore hedge-fund. We rely on our readers to fund our journalism. If you like what we do, please subscribe.
The organisation is concerned that the legislation doesn’t provide an upper-limit on the number of genetic modifications which are permitted – provided they could theoretically emerge through traditional breeding techniques.
One member of the committee noted at the meeting: “There isn’t an upper threshold – but the burden of proof is with the [product’s] applicant to make it plausible that it could be done in a traditional breeding programme. “
Another added: “At what point do you draw the line?” when there could be thousands of genetic modifications in a plant, plausibly permitted under the new rules.
Nimmo argues the lack of a ‘maximum’ number of genetic modifications is compounded by a lack of strong safeguards on how to ascertain that organisms could have been produced through conventional breeding.
Nimmo told this newspaper: “The discussion was really quite remarkable…It became absolutely clear that the new system for managing newer forms of genetically engineered organisms is not fit for purpose.
“The Committee responsible for assessing their risks is not able to talk about risks. Nor do they have any solid legal grounds for rejecting applications that allow companies to bypass risk assessment processes. This is incredibly bad news for the environment, public health and trust in Government agencies.”
She added: “Failure to assess the risks of new GMOs [genetically modified organisms] means a failure to understand the dangers posed.”
A spokesperson for the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) confirmed there is no specific limit to the number or size of genomic alterations that can be made within a single precision bred plant under the regulations.
Don’t miss a story
SIGN UP TO EMAIL UPDATES
“The scientific view provided by ACRE is that it would be inappropriate to provide an arbitrary limit on the number and size of genomic alterations that could be introduced in precision bred organisms given the variability in the plasticity of genetic elements.
“Those submitting marketing notices for precision bred plants should consider whether the number of genetic changes introduced could have arisen in their plant using traditional processes and provide sufficient evidence to su…