Tom Barry (Cork East, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the witnesses. It is hard to know where to start with this except to be direct in my approach. I have severe reservations about genetically modified material for a number of reasons. I qualified as a biochemist and at that stage, in the late 1980s and early 1990s, the human genome was sequenced. I did a PhD on homology modelling, which was something similar to what we are considering here. When one talks about the genome people get the impression that it is one straight line of sequences, but it comes together in a three dimensional model. The issue I have is that when we tamper with sequences at one part of the genome it could touch, promote, start or do something with the sequences on the other end, which are far away from each other but come close together in three dimensional structure.

We know the potential of virus sequences, which are short, but there are many sequences which, because we do not know what they can do, are redundant. While GM enables us to identify and put in traces that are beneficial we could at some stage, because we do not fully understand it, open up something that we do not want to open up. The point I am trying to make is that we are not long into GM in terms of the polymerase train reaction having been only developed in the 1980s. While there are many advantages to GM we need to be cautious to a certain extent.

In regard to the statement that we must not conflict with the EFSA's risk assessment, if we cannot conflict with its risk assessment are we not then operating with one arm behind our back? It was also stated that GMO is as "safe" as conventional use but, by way of illustration, there were many statements made a couple of years ago to the effect that our banks were fully capitalised. One cannot enter into something by putting down constants that may not be correct. In regard to the availability of GM crops on which glycocate can be sprayed, the argument has been made by many people that glycocate, or roundup as it is often called, if used on soil for long periods ruins the structure of the soil. I am a farmer. I would use glycocate only sparingly bearing in mind soil structure.

Reference was made to labelling. We cannot even get our country of origin labelling right. I would suggest that we get that labelling right before entering into this area. Another statement made earlier is that experts in the EFSA carry out a risk assessment of the data presented. Is the EFSA provided with all or only part of the data?

Reference was also made to trade difficulties. I am a tillage farmer. The current difficulty for the tillage industry is the recent production of three of the largest ever world harvests, as a result of which farmers are going out of business. The price of grain today is lower than it was 25 years ago. There will be no need to worry about grain production in Ireland into the future if this continues. That is a sad fact. Tillage farmers in Ireland are relying on high yields to survive. Only for the single farm payment many tillage farmers would be gone out of business. That is the reality of grain production in Ireland. In regard to the suggestion that we achieve higher yields to ensure lower prices, in a country like Ireland higher world production will put us at the mercy of importers and out of business.

It was also stated that the EU is only 35% self sufficient in proteins. Thankfully, following negotiations on the new single farm payment, a supplement of €100 per acre is now being paid in respect of crops such as beans. For the first time ever, I now grow beans and protein crops and will continue to do so. Perhaps we should put more effort into growing protein crops in the EU rather than looking to America and other areas to supply us with GM products. If we could manage to produce enough protein what is being proposed would be worthy of consideration. Currently, no effort is being made to protect our tillage industry. No effort is being made to make us different. We cannot compete on scale but we can compete on quality. We are about to accept the potential GM argument without first doing everything we can to increase protein production within the EU.

It was also stated that member states must be able to justify prohibition on the grounds of overriding public interest, in respect of which five grounds are listed. In my view, this restricts individual states' ability to object to GM foods if they have a concern. I do not like the headlong rush into this. The submission from the Department of Health ended with the following: "The Department of Health's view is that the provisions of the legislation currently in place for GM feeds provide adequate science-based safeguards". I am not convinced the safeguards we have in place are adequate.

With regard to the EPA presentation, I agree that our biopharm industry is very valuable.

I do not have a difficulty with that. It was stated that Irish farmers are concerned that they might become less competitive. As matters stand, we are already less competitive. Once one is losing money, it all becomes relative. I do not believe that growing GM crops will lead to tillage farmers being any better off. As a tillage farmer, I am of the view that the position will be quite the opposite.

In the context of proportionality, there appears to be a headlong rush into GM production. Reference was made to potatoes and I am aware of the fabulous work being done at Oak Park. However, it must be remembered that three or four years ago we were lucky to be in a position to export potatoes because there were just too many of them being grown here. I would have welcomed it if representatives from the pesticide control service had been invited to appear before us today. That service does great work and I would have liked to have heard its view on this matter. In a nutshell, we like the country to be perceived as having a green image. If the US and other countries throughout the world had segregated GM crops, there would be no problem. What would be the position if we presented those who buy food for their families a distinct choice between whether they would prefer to buy a bag of regular potatoes or a bag of clearly labelled GM potatoes? The concern that arises - be it right or wrong - is that people would go for the safer option. We must be very careful in the context of rushing headlong into promoting GM production. I remain of the view that there are still health concerns but I am willing to be persuaded - over time - that this is not the case. I will only be convinced when we have a proper understanding of the science involved.

From a purely business point of view, increased world production will mean that there will be no cereal industry left in this country. Our cereal industry is dying on its feet at present. I am of the view, therefore, that Europe should be seeking to produce more and more protein in order to give us something which we badly need. There was a fodder crisis in this country a number of years ago, which related to the fact that we were in expansion mode rather than that we were running out of protein. The price of soya remains quite high and people have been complaining about that fact. Perhaps by ensuring that we have an industry in this country, we can protect our selves from the vagaries of the markets in this regard. It must be remembered that speculation in respect of cereals - including proteins - is what adds vastly to the price in many cases. However, I accept that political instability also plays a part. Those are my views.