Brexit also in genetic engineering?

London Großbritannien England Westminster

The UK Department of the Environment DEFRA has launched a public consultation to introduce new genetic engineering processes. The anti-genetic engineering movement calls on the British to express their opposition. It fears that the government also wants to make the cultivation of old GM crops easier. The Scots are also not happy with the government’s move.

For British Environment Minister George Eustais, the case is clear: the European Court of Justice (ECJ) blocked the ability of new genetic engineering processes and halted scientific progress through its erroneous decision in summer 2018, he said. After leaving the European Union (EU), his government is now free to “make political decisions based on science and evidence”. It begins with this consultation. One can comment on the British Ministry’s plan by 17 March.

It seeks to exempt all organisms from genetic engineering law that could have been created through traditional breeding, whether new or old clinical trial procedures. According to the decision of the European Court of Justice, which is binding on European member states, plants that have been modified using new genetic engineering methods such as Crisp / Cas are generally subject to genetic engineering law. According to the consultation text, after evaluating the answers, changes in the law can be expected to occur within one to two years.

It includes a second part in which the Ministry of the Environment keeps a more comprehensive eye on the genetic engineering law, which it intends to amend after 30 years. The question is aimed at whether genetic engineering regulations are required or whether other food laws are sufficient to guarantee the safety of genetically modified foods. British regulations are still framed in such a way that they enforce the genetic engineering law of the European Union.

See also  Milwaukee Bucks playoff boycott send shockwaves through the sports world | NBA News

“It is clear that the government is using this consultation to begin the process of reevaluating all of its rules around old and new genetic engineering,” said Pat Thomas, director of genetic engineering-critical organization-BeyondGM. “There is no doubt that the Westminster government is considering deactivating all GMOs,” GMWatch editor-in-chief Claire Robinson wrote. She believes that the government will try to quickly eliminate the current regulations for new genetic engineering and then start a wider genetic engineering debate.

BeyondGM, GMWatch, GMFreeze and other organizations have called on the British to participate in the consultation and reject the government’s move. Because it would “repeal the protective measures necessary for people, animals, and the environment, as well as warn us of our right to choose what we buy and eat.” Organizations also criticized the text with the consultation, in which the government calls for the blessing of new genetic engineering. GMWatch spoke of “lying promotional material”.

The government’s GM-friendly curriculum has not only met with resistance from environmentalists. In 2015, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland banned the cultivation of genetic engineering according to the then applicable EU regulations and their anti-genetic engineering stance was seen by London plans. Scotland may soon be forced to accept the “marketing, sale and free circulation” of genetically modified food, the local government warned. Because it can set its own rules for genetic engineering in agriculture and food due to the federal system in Great Britain. However, there is free movement of goods within the UK.

Trade with the European Union will not be affected by the proposed deregulation, said Gideon Henderson, senior scientist at the Department of the Environment, Guardian, “There are ways to label genetically modified crops to target the markets in which we sell them . ” can do. “In the European Union, new GM plants still require approval in the form of food and feed, which should be implemented for the first time. [lf]

See also  Climate crisis: Big difference: Climate promise not enough, according to UN


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here