Dr. Thomas McLoughlin:

There could be. CRISPR could be used such that there would not be a need to introduce any foreign DNA, but the CRISPR technique could also be used such that a gene from another organism is inserted. It depends on what is used. Dr. Badmi mentioned SDN-1 and SDN-2. They are deregulated, if you like, in other jurisdictions. They are CRISPR techniques that, in our view, should not be regulated as GMO. A number of other countries in the world, such as the United States, Argentina and now the UK, can see this technology as hugely important rather than bulking everything together in the GMO regulations. As for the definition of GMO, our argument against the ECJ decision was that it has to involve something that occurs naturally. Mutations occur naturally in plants and micro-organisms. They are not included in the GMO regulations. The ECJ has bulked them all in together. The 12 people who wrote that article, including me, and other people since have argued that that decision was probably not the right one. Even the Council of the European Union was not happy with it either. We might have another chance with the French going back and asking for more clarity. As for the decision and the EU study, that is where the Department of the Minister, Deputy Eamon Ryan, will come in. It is the policymaker in Ireland. However, if we lose this technology in Ireland and if both techniques are treated as GMOs, they will never see the light of day. That is the concern I and my colleagues have.