No Science Minister?

The failure of the new FG/Labour coalition to appoint a Junior Minister for science is very disappointing.

It is in contrast to the previous administration who, although they did a lot of things wrong, had a junior minister with responsibility for 'Science, Technology & Innovation'.

This junior ministry spot was held by Conor Lenihan who had his own unfortunate incident when for a period, it looked as if he would launch a book suggesting that evolution was a load of rubbish. In the end, and after some amount of controversy, he didn't launch the book.

Personalities aside, it is important that science is represented in this government. As a scientist, I would argue that there should be a full minister with a seat at the cabinet table. I realise that this may be a bit of a long shot, so a junior ministerial spot might be all we can expect.

Unfortunately, with the announcement of the 15 new junior ministers, it seems that science is nowhere to be seen.

Sean Sherlock, a very capable politician gets 'Research & Innovation' which, one assumes is a reincarnation of the 'science,technology and innovation' position. But if so, then why drop the reference to science? Has science become less important since the last Dail sat?

This may be just a perception thing and some would argue that it doesn't matter what the ministers are called as long as they get the job done. Fair enough, but as Enda Kenny seems to have realised, politics is often about perception and 'optics'.

I believe it is important that science is well represented at a national level. The omission of a minister with clear, defined responsibility for science does nothing to suggest that this new administration takes science and a knowledge-led recovery seriously. I believe it is a mistake not to have a science minister and not to have that person clearly identified as such.

Science and GM in Election 2011

The presence of the Labour Spokesperson on Science, Ruairi Quinn at an anti-GM press conference raises questions about the party's credibility on the GM issue.

At a recent talk I presented on the GM crops issue and in a recent article here and for the Guardian science blog, I suggested that the GM issue had now become an election issue.

On Monday, celebrity chef Clodagh McKenna along with people from "food, farming, conservation and human rights sectors" gathered in Dublin to speak about what their press release called the "inherent dangers of new moves to allow a relaxing of laws in relation to genetically modified food and feed". See the bottom of this post for a video from Monday's press conference.

Calling the GM "lobby" the "Anglo-Irish Bank" of the food sector, the grouping called for (amongst other things) another moratorium on GMO.

Representatives from the Irish Organic Farmers and Growers Association (IOFGA), Western Organic Network, Irish Seed Savers, and Afri amongst others met to denounce what they called a "dubious scientific review" of the GM issue.

All very predictable. It is to the direct economic benefit of the organic sector to ensure that GM does not get a fair hearing. It is to the direct economic benefit of the organic sector to scare consumers into rejecting GM food products.

It is analogous to the guy who produces white bread telling consumers that brown bread will give them leprosy - it has absolutely no scientific basis, but as a marketing ploy, it does wonders for white bread sales!
What was most surprising about the press conference was the very visible presence of Labour spokesperson on Education and Science Ruairi Quinn TD.

Labour are against the cultivation of GM crops on the island of IrelandIt is surprising given the stated position of the Labour Party on the issue.  Although Labour are against the cultivation of GM crops on the island of Ireland, they are in favour of the importation of animal feed potentially containing trace amounts of GM material.

The party's 2006 21-part plan for "A Quality Future for Rural Ireland" commits the party to "work towards the aspiration of a GMO production free island of Ireland within the context of the relevant EU and UK legislation and in the relevant national and international fora.

"Until that aim is achieved", the policy document continues, "the Labour Party will push for the strongest possible evidence-based rules governing the release of GMOs into the environment".

Two things strike me as interesting about this statement. First is the careful wording of the the first paragraph and the aspiration of a "GMO production free island", clearly not ruling out the importation of GM animal feed - as is the party's stated policy.

Secondly, the plan calls for "evidence-based rules" governing the release of GMOs. These evidence-based rules do not seem to be important when deciding the core position- that of being for or against GM crops.

While the Labour Party are to be commended on clearly spelling out their position on GM (the party line of anti-GM cultivation but pro GM  importation seems quite straightforward), the presence of the party's science spokesperson at Monday's launch suggests a different viewpoint.

Speaking at a meeting of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Agriculture, Fisheries and Food Debate in 2008, Sean Sherlock, Labour Spokesperson on Agriculture and Food pointed out: "The EU scientific committee has applied a certain rationale which is based on common sense and practical solutions. If it is advocating a certain position [on the GM feed issue], I do not understand why the Government is not adhering to that advice or why it would abstain on votes when the time comes".

"if the EU scientific committee advises and recommends that we import certain feedstuffs, I do not see why the Government cannot approve it" - Sean SherlockThere is no dichotomy or contradiction between maintaining the biodiversity of this island and the importation of EU-approved feedstuffs. The two are not mutually exclusive. It is reasonable to express reservations about scientific trials on the growth of GM feedstuffs pending further debate and dialogue. However, if the EU scientific committee advises and recommends that we import certain feedstuffs, I do not see why the Government cannot approve it. We have all bought into that process by virtue of our membership of the EU", said Sherlock.

The labour spokesperson continued: "The precautionary principle is rolled out when it is politically expedient to do so. The Green wedge or wing of the Government has a politically philosophical position on these issues and there is a certain constituency to which it must play. This is to the detriment of Irish agriculture and ultimately the Irish consumer who will end up, if we continue on this route, paying less but without a guarantee that imported livestock or meat products from third countries are GM-free."

In a brief statement on twitter, a Labour Party spokesperson confirmed to Communicate Science that Quinn was representing the party at Monday's event and said that the party "are against growing GM crops here, but are not opposed to importing GM feed". This seems directly at odds with Ruairi Quinn's

very visible endorsement of a GM-free Ireland concept which specifically, according to the groups own press release, is also strongly opposed to the importation of animal feed potentially containing trace amounts of GM material.

it is sending senior figures to campaign for a GM free IrelandThat the Labour Party is against the cultivation of GM crops in Ireland is clearly laid out in their 2006 policy document. I would argue that there is no scientific basis for this position, but that is beside the point. What is problematic for the party is that on the one hand it is sending senior figures to campaign for a GM free Ireland - and against imported animal feed potentially containing trace amounts of GM material; while on the other hand saying that it is not opposed to the importation of such feed. 

As I've said, the Labour Party have a clear policy on this issue and while I disagree with it, they are to be commended for outlining that position, unlike a number of other parties. However, the voting public deserve to know whether or not a potential Minister for Science in the next government has rejected the overwhelming volume of scientific advice on this matter and has arguably been used as part of a marketing strategy for the anti-GM lobby.

The following video is from Monday's press conference. Ruairi Quinn sets out Labour party policy from 2:30 min onwards.

Is GM now an election issue in Ireland?

Amidst the background of one of the most divisive and stormy parliamentary elections in Ireland's history, the outgoing government has made a significant move on GM crops.

Outgoing Minister for Agriculture, Brendan Smith, from the ruling Fianna Fáil party, confirmed in a statement this week (Tuesday, Feb 8th) that Ireland has changed its voting position and will now support a number of EU Commission proposals designed to allow for the marketing of GM food, feed and food ingredients.

The move, although welcomed in many quarters will no doubt cause controversy, not least from the ruling party's former coalition allies the Green Party, whose departure from government triggered a general election to be held on February 25^th next.

Up till now, the GM issue has been absent from the debate over who should form the next government. Understandably, voters have been more worried about their jobs and the future of Ireland's economy than to be interested in the details of EU policy and rhetoric from pro- and anti-GM sides.

It's not the first time that the GM issue has impacted on this coalition government. Back in 2009, the Green Party - Fianna Fáil government had to renegotiate their terms of agreement and their programme for government (pdf). This led to a major concession to the Greens - the promise of making Ireland a 'GM-Free Zone'.

Although much trumpeted by the Greens then, it has never become a reality. Neither has the promise to introduce a GM-Free logo modelled on the German "Ohne Gentechnik" logo.

In a short response on twitter, Green Party Chairman and Senator Dan Boyle replied that the u-turn had shown “what Fianna Fáil really thinks of consumer fears” and that, in government, the Green party “had stopped this”.

Meanwhile, the Green Party’s Agriculture spokesperson Trevor Sargent said the party was “alarmed” by the move and that “in government, the Green Party ensured that Ireland abstained on this vote”.

Calling the move a backward step, Sargent said that the issue was about “consumer choice” and that the decision “damages the quality image of Irish food produce”.

Brendan Smith explained this week that "it has been a matter of great concern to Ireland, in recent years, that there has been a severe disruption to trade of animal feed, caused by the delays in the authorisation, by the EU, of GM varieties which have already been approved in the exporting countries."

According to Smith, the difficulty of importing certified GM-free animal feed  (90% of which comes from North and South America) has led to the shortfall having been made up by more expensive feed which puts Irish meat producers at a serious disadvantage. The Irish Farmers Association say this disadvantage can be as much as €15 on every pig produced.

The greens however dispute this argument asserting that “as cattle eat grass most of the year, this small premium would represent a tiny price differential for the customer (e.g. 2c on a Sunday roast)”. That’s fine, I guess if you’re eating beef and not pork on a Sunday.

Ireland's support for the EU Commission proposals was confirmed at a meeting of the EU Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health in Brussels on Tuesday.

GM-Free Ireland, had called (pdf) for Smith to vote against the proposals saying they would "undermine our Government's agreed GM-Free policy". The Irish Organic Farmers and Growers Association called the move “short-sighted” and argued that the decision did not reflect the wishes of the people.  Clearly though, with the Greens now out of government, the remaining Fianna Fáil ministers were free to make decisions without the input of their former partners.

The EU proposal seeks to remove the "zero tolerance" policy towards GM components of animal feed and allow trace amounts, up to 0.1% to be imported.

It will be interesting to see whether one of the final decisions of the outgoing administration will lead to GM becoming an issue in this election. One suspects not, but it may at least allow the public to hear from each political party where they stand on the GM issue.

The author will be presenting a talk entitled Trust Me, I'm A Scientist: Genetically Modified Crops and the Public Perception of Science to a meeting of Cork Skeptics in Blackrock Castle Observatory, Cork on Friday February 18th, 2011 at 8pm. All Welcome.

This article also appears, in an edited form on The Guardian science blog: Notes and Theories.

Government needs to fund agri-education properly

In the next seven weeks, politicians from all parties will turn up at your day looking for your vote. I know I'll be asking them all about their commitment to education.

It's worrying then, to see the effect that cutbacks are having on Ireland's agricultural development agency Teagasc and particularly on their educational remit.

Despite the Irish food industry having a bumper year, Prof. Gerry Boyle, Teagasc Director, says that they have had turn away 250 young farmers because they don't have the staff to train them.

Speaking to the Irish Examiner, Prof. Boyle explains the effect the governments moratorium on recruitment is having: "We had around 150 contract advisors, but they have all been let go. We are down to around 240 advisors from our previous level of 400.

"As for teaching and lecturing staff, you can get by without staff in some areas, but not without teachers...Agri is being treated differently to other areas in education. For the life of me, I don't understand that.

"We have had to turn away about 250 students due to the moratorium. While I recognise that there is a need to reduce numbers in the public sector, there is a need to ring-fence specialist roles.

"We are under-resourced in beef where applied research is concerned. We need a stronger genetics input. Plant pathology is a crucial competence in managing disease resistance, but we don't even have one plant pathologist".

All this, when Bord Bia is reporting how huge an impact food and agriculture had on the Irish economy last year. Food and drink exports was worth €7.9 billion to Ireland in 2010 and that figure is set to grow again.

Aiden Cotter, Bord Bia Chief Executive was upbeat in his assessment: "In a year in which the world’s population will reach seven billion, growth in global demand is set to underpin food markets well into the future".

If this, or any government is committed to a national recovery, they must realise that food and agriculture is already at the centre of that recovery. While savings in the public sector must be made, it is not in our long term interest to stop training those farmers will be part of that recovery. Maybe mention that to the politicians when they call.