Fwd: GMW:_GM_Nation?_You_bet!_-_The_conflicts_driving_commercialisation

[Guest guest]

GMW:_GM_Nation?_You_bet!_-_The_conflicts_driving_commercialisation

" GM_WATCH "

Mon, 8 Mar 2004 14:19:13 GMT

 

GM Watch daily: http://www.gmwatch.org

PLEASE SUPPORT OUR WORK - details: http://www.gmwatch.org/donate.asp

---

On the eve of commercialisation of GM crops in the UK, GM WATCH would like to

remind everybody of just where power and influence resides in this country.

---

GM Nation? You bet!

 

The overwhelming majority of the UK public are known to be strongly opposed to

GM commecialisation. This was reflected in every aspect of the official " GM

Nation? " public debate, and even in the skewed citizens' jury organised by the

Food Standards Agency. Last week an report from the House of Commons'

Environmmental Audit Committee called for commercialisation not to go ahead at

this point and for much more testing to be done. The cross-party report was

unanimous that GM commercialisation could not be justified. There was not one

dissenting voice

 

Yet tomorrow an announcement is expected from the Secretary of State for the

Environment, Margaret Beckett, giving the go ahead for the commercialisation of

Bayer's (GM) Chardon LL fodder maize. Statements are also expected in Scotland

and Wales indicating that a deal has been agreed to place Chardon LL on the

national seed list, despite the many unresolved issues and controversies

surrounding it.

 

One of those controversies arises from new scientific evidence from Norway on

the cauliflower mosaic virus (CaMV) promoter found in Chardon LL and other GM

crops. But that research, like other research that has raised questions about

the promoter, almost certainly never had a chance of being considered seriously.

 

To understand why just consider the whereabouts of Tony Blair's principal

financial supporter, biotech advisor and Science Minister while the GM public

debate in the UK was taking place. He was off in the United States attending the

Biotech Industry Organisation's annual convention and studying how to make UK

science still more commercially minded.

 

The results of the kind of industrial alignment that Lord Sainsbury has been

working hard to encourage could be seen in the paper published by Perry et al.

on Nature's website on Friday. The paper was clearly designed and timed - almost

certainly with Government collusion - to undermine the conclusions of the

Environmental Audit Committee's report published the same day.

 

The paper is, to say the very least, highly speculative in supporting its claim

that there would be a marginal environmental benefit from GM maize. It was so

speculative that the Chairman of the Environmental Audit Committe dismissed it

as " neither robust nor particularly credible science " .

 

According to their declaration of competing financial interests, two of the

scientists who provided this political fig leaf have had, and anticipate

continuing to have, research contracts with Bayer Crop Protection - the division

that sells the herbicide linked to Bayer's GM maize. The other authors declare

they have " no competing financial interests " . In reality, though, almost all

work for institutes (Rothamsted, Brooms Barn, and the Scottish Crop Research

Institute) which have strong financial ties to the biotech industry.

 

Take, for instance, the principal author of the paper, Prof Joe Perry, who works

at Rothamsted. According to a statement previously available on the Rothamsted

website, 'We look upon most of our arrangements with commercial companies as

partnerships'. Rothamsted sees such partnerships as providing the opportunity

for 'a seamless mix of basic research and practical applications.' The statement

listed Aventis (Aventis Crop Science is now part of Bayer), DuPont, Novartis and

Syngenta, as among Rothamsted's 'partners'. This statement, however, appears to

have recently been removed from the site, leaving no way of currently

identifying Rothamsted's industry partners.

 

Ironically, the current edition of the journal Nature, which was so obliging in

the timing of its publication of the Perry et al paper, carries an article on

the MMR scandal. This reports how the medical journal, The Lancet, has said it

would never have published the MMR component of Dr Andrew Wakefield’s study if

it had known about his having received money from the Legal Aid Board for

investigating the MMR-autism link. Wakefield was vilified in the UK media over

this conflict of interest with The Sunday Times, which broke the news of the

conflict, saying in its report that scientific studies authored by researchers

with possible conflicts of interest are " fatally flawed " .

 

Yet, Wakefield's conflict of interest, as George Monbiot recently pointed out,

is as nothing in comparison with those that impact on the UK's science

establishment. And those conflicts go right to the heart of Tony Blair's

Government and the process by which it has reviewed the scientific safety of

this technology. Indeed, if you want to understand the commercial alignment of

UK science there is no better place to start than with the UK's Science

Minister.

 

The leading player in biotechnology research in this country is the Sainsbury

Laboratory at the John Innes Centre. It's a joint venture between Lord

Sainsbury's Gatsby Foundation, the University of East Anglia, the BBSRC and the

John Innes Foundation. Funding for the Sainsbury Laboratory is primarily through

grants from the Gatsby Foundation but it also gets public money via the public

funding body for the bio-sciences, the BBSRC, whose grant is determined by Lord

Sainsbury's department. Last year it was revealed that Sainsbury as Science

Minister had overseen a massive 300 per cent increase in his department's

funding for the Sainsbury Laboratory.

 

Sainsbury became Tony Blair's Science Minister in 1998. He is also a member of

the cabinet biotechnology committee, Sci-Bio, responsible for national policy on

biotechnology including GM crops and foods. Although a key adviser to Blair on

biotech, he apparently absents himself from decisions impacting directly on GM

foods because, it is said, of his connection to the Sainsbury supermarket chain.

 

When he was made Science Minister, Lord Sainsbury resigned as Chairman of the

Sainsbury's supermarket chain and put into a blind trust major investments in

two plant genetics-related investment companies (Diatech Ltd and Innotech

Investments Ltd). Innotech is known to have a substantial stake in a firm called

Paradigm Genetics involved in a joint GM-related venture with Monsanto.

 

Lord Sainsbury's GM investment company Diatech has funded research at the

Sainsbury Laboratory. Dr Roger Freedman, the Director of Diatech approved the

work. Dr. Freedman is also on the board of the Sainsbury Laboratory Council,

which oversees the Sainsbury Laboratory. In short, Sainsbury heads a government

department that gives money to the Laboratory (via the BBSRC) that he supports

and which bears his name, and on whose board is the man who runs his company,

currently held in a blind trust. But the story doesn't end there.

 

In 1987 the scientist Mike Wilson was named as the inventor of a UK patent

(number 8801508) that could generate millions from GM commercialisation. Diatech

was listed as the patent applicant. The patent, which Wilson and Diatech also

filed in the US in 1995, is seen as being crucial to the future of genetic

engineering. Wilson and Diatech also filed two other similar patents in the US,

which relate to what is known as translational enhances, which boost the amount

of protein produced by a GM gene making it more effective. They enhance various

viruses, one of which is called the cauliflower mosaic virus (CaMV), which works

as an on-off switch for genetic engineering.

 

Mosaic viruses are widely used in genetic engineering, but their use, especially

that of the cauliflower mosaic virus has been highly controversial. In addition

to the new research questioning its safety, it was at the centre of the row over

GM safety ignited when Dr Arpad Pusztai alleged in World in Action in the late

nineties that his rats being fed GM potatoes had suffered growth retardation and

a damaged immune system. Dr Pusztai alleged that an independent statistical

analysis of his research showed that the cauliflower mosaic virus itself damaged

the rats.

 

These days Mike Wilson, who is seen as being evangelically pro-biotech, and

recently attacked the press in a letter to the Times for peddling " blatant

anti-GM propaganda, unbridled conspiracy theories and scientifically-unfounded

scare-stories " , heads Horticulture Research International. Although HRI is

responsible to the Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs, three

members of its board are chosen directly by Lord Sainsbury.

 

Wilson is a consultant to Diatech. He was also a key member of the Government's

GM Science Review Panel that met over the summer, but he was far from the only

scientist on the panel that is linked to Lord Sainsbury and his funding network.

 

Professor John Gray is from the Department of Plant Science, at the University

of Cambridge. He is a council member and trustee of the Sainsbury Laboratory, as

well as being on the Science Advisory Panel of the Gatsby Charitable Trust,

along with Dr. Roger Freedman of Diatech. Professor Gray is also the chairman of

the Trustees of the Gatsby organisation, Science and Plants for Schools, along

with Miss Judith Portrait, who manages Lord Sainsbury's blind trusts.

 

The Science Review Panel also included 3 scientists with links to the John Innes

Centre, which houses the Sainsbury Laboratory. The first is Professor Chris

Leaver, from the Department of Plant Sciences, University of Oxford, who is also

a trustee of the John Innes Foundation, the director of John Innes Bioprospects

Ltd, the director of John Innes Agriculture. He is also a member of the John

Innes Centre Governing Council and a Trustee of the John Innes Foundation.

 

Two review panel members work at the John Innes Centre. Professor Dale is the

leader of Genetic Modification and Biosafety Research Group at the Centre and

Professor Michael Gale is the associate Research Director there. Gale though is

also a director of John Innes Enterprises and a consultant to Plant Bioscience

Ltd or PBL.

 

Based at the John Innes Centre, PBL is an independent technology management

company, which is jointly owned by the JIC and Lord Sainsbury's Gatsby

Foundation. It was set up by the Gatsby Foundation in 1994, when Lord Sainsbury

himself headed the Foundation. Although Sainsbury does not have dealings with

the Gatsby Foundation while he is a Minister, Dr. Roger Freedman from Diatech is

still on the PBL board. Freedman is also named as an applicant and inventor

along with Diatech and the John Innes Centre in a patent on the regulation of

plant genes.

 

PBL also has a number of GM patents that could be exploited if GM

commercialisation went ahead. Last year the Sunday Times reported how since

Labour came to power in 1997, the Department of Trade and Industry had given

GBP743,000 to PBL. The government payments to PBL were awarded in three tranches

by an independent panel, but at least two were signed off by Sainsbury in his

capacity as the minister responsible for the awards. PBL is described as 'a

for-profit technology interaction and intellectual property management company

specialising in plant and microbial science'.

 

In a Financial Times article last year, Lord Sainsbury lamented the nation's

failure to celebrate the 'stunning change in the entrepreneurial attitudes' of

UK public science. The nation may think it has its own reasons for lamentation,

given a GM-enthusiast Science Minister who is also a major donor to Tony Blair's

Labour Party.

 

Sainsbury gave Labour its biggest ever single donation in September 1997. On

October 3 1997 he was made a life peer by Blair and a year later Minister for

Science. By 2003 he had given over GBP11 million to the Labour Party.

 

Mark Seddon, a member of Labour's National Executive Committee, told the BBC,

" In any other country I think a government minister donating such vast amounts

of money and effectively buying a political party would be seen for what it is,

a form of corruption of the political process. " Seddon said it was causing

Labour to lose members amid criticism from the grassroots that the party was now

" in the pockets of the powerful and the rich " .

 

That perception will only be heightened when Margaret Beckett stands up to make

her statement in the House of Commons.

 

GM Nation? You bet.

 

....

Notes

 

The following scientists on the GM Science Review can all be linked to Lord

Sainsbury’s " empire " :

 

Professor John Gray - Gatsby Charitable Foundation - Senior Plant Science

Adviser; Chairman of the Trustees Science and Plants for Schools (SAPS) - a

Gatsby organisation - Trustees also include Judith Portrait -runs his blind

trust; Council member and Trustee - Sainsbury Laboratory (Norwich); Horticulture

Research International - Non-executive Director .

 

Professor Chris Leaver FRS - John Innes Foundation - Director, John Innes

Bioprospects Ltd; Director, John Innes Agriculture; Member, John Innes Centre

Governing Council; Trustee - John Innes Foundation; Science Media Centre, Royal

Institution of G.B; Member of Science Advisory Panel

 

Michael Wilson; Diatech Ltd Consultant

 

Professor Michael Gale; Associate Research Director at the John Innes Centre;

John Innes Enterprises - Director; Plant Bioscience Ltd., Norwich - Consultant

-Freedman on the board

 

Professor Philip Dale; Leader of Genetic Modification and Biosafety Research

Group at the John Innes Centre.

 

 

-----------------------

SUBSCRIPTIONS

-----------------------

 

http://www.gmwatch.org/sub.asp

 

 

see end of this message

 

communicate

ngin

 

donate

http://www.gmwatch.org/donate.asp

 

archive

http://www.gmwatch.org/archive.asp

 

websites

http://www.gmwatch.org

http://www.ngin.org.uk

 

 

 

 

 

 

Search - Find what you’re looking for faster.