The Agriculture Committee has agreed to the following Report:—

1. On 17 May 2000 the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food announced by way of written answer that some of the conventional rapeseed sold by Advanta Seeds UK and sown in 1999 and 2000 in several Member States of the European Union, including the United Kingdom, contained about 1 per cent genetically modified rapeseed. The Government had been advised by the Advisory Committee on Releases to the Environment (ACRE) and the Food Standards Agency that there was no risk to public health or the environment. Nevertheless, a package of measures relating to seed purity was outlined, including pressing for concerted international action to seek new legal standards for seed purity, testing seed imports and working with the industry on a Code of Practice. Later, on 8 June, the Minister announced that there would also be a review of separation distances, including a scientific review of the relationship between separation and crop purity. Advanta Seeds meanwhile told us that it has traced nearly all the affected seed sown in this country and has arranged a compensation package for farmers who planted the seed in question of £337 per hectare south of a line between Newcastle and Carlisle and £370 per hectare above that line. The European Commission has also agreed that farmers may claim subsidy payments on crops planted up to 15 June to allow for the replanting of fields which had been sown with affected seed or for the fields to be left empty, something the industry welcomes.

2. This incident raises many issues of public concern, relating to segregation, regulation and testing. In our Third Report of this Session, The Segregation of Genetically Modified Foods, we examined similar questions with a focus on the implications for the consumer of the growing adoption of GM crops in the US and the possibility of future commercial plantings in the UK. We concluded that the industry guidelines overseen by SCIMAC "offer a firm basis on which to build in order to segregate GM and non-GM crops in the UK countryside", but recommended that the Government should "ensure that the separation distances set out in the SCIMAC guidelines be reviewed if there is clear evidence of cross-pollination taking place within the existing guidelines".[1] We emphasise that the SCIMAC guidelines need to be kept under constant review and that it is imperative to build a broader consensus on this controversial issue. We also spent some time examining the EU regulations on GM content in foods and the importance of clear, informative, meaningful labelling. This background led us to resolve to explore with Ministers the implications for segregation of Advanta's discovery of GM content within its conventional seed supplies. Consequently, we held a single session of evidence with Advanta Seeds, followed by Baroness Hayman, Minister of State, MAFF, and the Rt hon Michael Meacher, Minister for the Environment, Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions, accompanied by officials, on 18 July 2000. We are grateful to our witnesses for agreeing to appear before us and also to those who submitted written evidence in the necessarily truncated time available between the finalisation of arrangements and the hearing itself.

3. The proximity of the parliamentary recess makes it impossible for us to do justice to this complex and highly important issue before the House rises. We therefore intend to return to the subject in the autumn. However, the evidence given by Ministers highlighted certain concerns which must be addressed in the short term. Clearer procedures are required for dealing with incidents of this kind. It was obvious that confusion existed as to which Ministry should lead on the issue. The lengthy internal debates on the incident contrasts with the robust, rapid Swedish disclosure in like circumstances. Planting of the new crop of winter oilseed rape begins in August[2] and it is essential that farmers are able to plant these crops with confidence. This means that this year's batch of seed must be tested and certified as free from GM content. For farmers near the field trials, it is also vital that they can be sure that their crops are protected as far as possible from inadvertent cross-pollination which will require a rapid assessment of the consultation on segregation distances and an equally rapid implementation of the advice which emerges as a result. Similarly, preliminary results from the trials on gene flow should be peer-reviewed as soon as possible. Seed companies too need urgent regulatory guidance from the Government, if only in the interim, in order that the possibility of seeds with GM impurities being planted in the UK be minimised. The question of liability should be addressed in this context. Finally, and above all, the newly-established Agriculture and Environment Biotechnology Commission must be involved in these processes. These judgements will carry little confidence outside a narrow scientific community without broader consideration.

4. In the longer term, it is clear that the Government must work with its partners in the EU to produce workable regulations on seed purity, including thresholds and testing, as has been done for food. We expect progress to be made in this area over the summer. Baroness Hayman told us that she anticipated an outcome by Christmas this year.[3] Even for a voluntary agreement, this is a very ambitious timetable indeed, given the necessarily slow procedures of achieving agreement between Member States. We recognise that there is appparently no call for concern on health or environmental grounds as a direct result of the circumstances revealed by the Government in May and that the level of "contamination" in this case was extremely low, below the threshold allowed for adventitious GM content in non-GM foods. We also accept the advice given to us by scientists during our last inquiry that 100% purity is neither possible nor verifiable. Nevertheless, this event has highlighted a gap in the regulatory framework for the control of genetically modified organisms which has serious repercussions for segregation and consumer confidence. This gap must be closed. Our decision not to rush into overhasty conclusions on how this should be done is a reflection of the importance of the issue. We shall announce details of how we intend to proceed later this year.