Calendar An icon of a desk calendar. Cancel An icon of a circle with a diagonal line across. Caret An icon of a block arrow pointing to the right. Email An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of the Facebook "f" mark. Google An icon of the Google "G" mark. Linked In An icon of the Linked In "in" mark. Logout An icon representing logout. Profile An icon that resembles human head and shoulders. Telephone An icon of a traditional telephone receiver. Tick An icon of a tick mark. Is Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes. Is Not Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes with a diagonal line through it. Pause Icon A two-lined pause icon for stopping interactions. Quote Mark A opening quote mark. Quote Mark A closing quote mark. Arrow An icon of an arrow. Folder An icon of a paper folder. Breaking An icon of an exclamation mark on a circular background. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Caret An icon of a caret arrow. Clock An icon of a clock face. Close An icon of the an X shape. Close Icon An icon used to represent where to interact to collapse or dismiss a component Comment An icon of a speech bubble. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Ellipsis An icon of 3 horizontal dots. Envelope An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Home An icon of a house. Instagram An icon of the Instagram logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. Magnifying Glass An icon of a magnifying glass. Search Icon A magnifying glass icon that is used to represent the function of searching. Menu An icon of 3 horizontal lines. Hamburger Menu Icon An icon used to represent a collapsed menu. Next An icon of an arrow pointing to the right. Notice An explanation mark centred inside a circle. Previous An icon of an arrow pointing to the left. Rating An icon of a star. Tag An icon of a tag. Twitter An icon of the Twitter logo. Video Camera An icon of a video camera shape. Speech Bubble Icon A icon displaying a speech bubble WhatsApp An icon of the WhatsApp logo. Information An icon of an information logo. Plus A mathematical 'plus' symbol. Duration An icon indicating Time. Success Tick An icon of a green tick. Success Tick Timeout An icon of a greyed out success tick. Loading Spinner An icon of a loading spinner. Facebook Messenger An icon of the facebook messenger app logo. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Facebook Messenger An icon of the Twitter app logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. WhatsApp Messenger An icon of the Whatsapp messenger app logo. Email An icon of an mail envelope. Copy link A decentered black square over a white square.

Comment: Luddite stance on gene editing will cost dearly

Force of nature: Gene editing is a valuable facility to allow the precision breeding of plants and animals.
Force of nature: Gene editing is a valuable facility to allow the precision breeding of plants and animals.

The genie was out of the bottle long before George Eustice announced a Defra consultation on gene editing (GE) back in January.

Most scientists and the majority of farmers have been champing at the bit for years to get access to the technology for the precision breeding of plants and animals, and pioneering work has been going on in leading labs like the James Hutton Institute at Invergowrie for almost a decade.

If Brexit has one saving grace it is that it provided the opportunity for the UK to look independently at regulating GE differently from genetic modification (GM) – and Defra seized the moment.

It’s important to remember the distinction between gene editing and modification.  GM involves the DNA of one species being introduced into different one, whereas GE – which is already being used in Australia, Japan, Argentina – is about speeding up changes which could eventually take place naturally over a long period of time.

All the indications now point to the UK Government being minded to change the regulations on GE

Defra’s consultation closed this week and we already know that the farmers’ unions, leading science institutes and Scotland’s agri-supply industry among many others gave the proposal the thumbs-up.

We also know the Scottish Government set its face firmly against GE many years ago, although when asked this week if there had been any softening in the approach to the technique, Rural Affairs minister Ben Macpherson responded ambiguously –  deliberately or otherwise –   by directing his comments to the government’s policy on GM and maintaining Scotland’s GM-free status. Surely he knows that’s not what’s on the agenda?

Rural Affairs minister Ben Macpherson.

There is, of course, a new imperative for making radical changes to the tools at the farming industry’s disposal.  Government targets for meeting net zero emissions and biodiversity goals require agriculture to be nifty in adapting to the challenges, particularly if food and drink output is to also to be scaled up to meet Scotland’s “Ambition 2030” goals.

All the indications now point to the UK Government being minded to change the regulations on GE, and while there are trade risks  of diverging policy with Europe,  a European Commission review on the subject is due to be published next month and there is growing pressure from France in particular for access to the technology.

It’s all far from being a done deal, but the Scottish Government needs to heed the advice of its own scientists, listen to the needs of the farming industry and make every effort to ensure consumers understand GE is safe.

Otherwise its Luddite stance will cost us dearly.