Dr. Barbara Doyle Prestwich:

I might take that first. One of the reasons I mentioned democratisation relates to the fact that the biggest difference with CRISPR technology in the context of regulation relates to the fact that what happened, say, 30 years ago will not happen again. We are seeing this already within the public sector and among SMEs. If we correctly regulate this and do not classify it under a GMO, we can democratise the process. People such as us in academic labs around Ireland will have greater access, and access to commercialisation will be a more level playing field.

Furthermore, more than 30 years ago, two of the main traits in genetically modified crops were insect resistance and herbicide tolerance. In the few years in which CRISPR has been used in this way, however, we are seeing a much more diverse range of traits that will suit smaller holdings as well. I refer to resistance to drought, for example, or, in the context of health, the issue of increased oil the Deputy mentioned and so on. Certainly, in terms of democratisation, there will be significant changes if CRISPR is regulated in the right way such that we do not push towards the large multinationals. As I said, it has been well documented that the regulation of crops is very expensive. Applying to get a product onto the market can cost up to €20 million. As universities, we cannot afford this, and neither can SMEs, which are being pushed out of the market in that regard.