How much will the British miss the quality products of old Europe? There is little rhetoric in this question, given that a public consultation on the practice of gene editing is starting in the country these days.
A technique that allows you to genetically modify dozens of products intended for the tables.
It is also being talked about in Italy, but the growth of organic farming and the protests have slowed everything down. Great Britain, on the other hand, is preparing for a sensational about-face on those GMOs that European rules prohibit.
Evidently he was expecting a good opportunity to overturn the rules of protection and sustainability. The repercussions on millions of consumers and on the narrative of the green economy matter little, at least for now.
Boris Johnson's government has chosen the NBT New Breeding Techniques technique which “could unlock substantial benefits for nature, the environment and help farmers with crops resistant to pests, diseases or extreme weather conditions“ reports Agenzia Rinnovabili.it.
But London's advertising goes so far as to promise "healthier and more nutritious food" with the new methods.
When we all talk about environmental sustainability and biodiversity, it is very difficult to share such a strategy. What effects will we see on imports of organic, non-GMO products, in addition to the rules of the new trade agreements. Will the country still be able to stand by the farmers who are fighting for uncontaminated agriculture?
We also think of Prince Charles, a lover and supporter of good eco practices. George Eustice, secretary of state for the environment and food, tried to explain the new post-Brexit course: “Gene editing has the ability to exploit the genetic resources provided by mother nature, in order to face the challenges of our age.
This includes growing crops that yield better results, reducing costs for farmers and reducing impacts on the environment. It helps us adapt to the challenges of climate change." A motivation that, according to him, would keep the organisms regenerated with the new technique separate from those modified in the old way. He explained it, but he didn't convince because the fight for quality agriculture seems to have more strength than political options.
Laboratory alchemy still leads to genome editing, with growing fears for health and nutrition. It is said that while the old GMOs mix and recombine the DNA factors by trial and error, the new ones with genomic editing act with greater certainty in precise points of the genome. Thus we have unnatural fruit, vines, tomatoes, sold in an antithetical way to organic crops. Legal concerns are also strong.
The post-Brexit food actually circumvents a sentence of the European Court of Justice which banned the new GMOs by assimilating them to the old ones. No longer having to respect EU rules, the British are preparing new internal rules that are more favorable to new applications. The government is convinced that citizens will get over it. Fortunately, the story goes in another direction. Except that nothing can repay British consumers for the extraordinary quality of unmodified fruit and vegetables. Unless the consultation becomes a boomerang.
