Recently Þuríður Backman, an MP in the Icelandic National Assembly – the Althing – put questions to the Minister of Agriculture about plans to grow GM medicine barley in Iceland.  The minister´s reply indicates that the authorities have not examined other nations´ experience of GM agriculture. The reply seems to reflect assurances supplied by the biotech industry (f.e. ORF) and lack the balance of information needed to promote informed debate. It is worth noting that the minister does not specify where the GM medicine barley is grown in Iceland, nor does he answer a question about the potential impact of GM agriculture on the image of Icelandic food production.

Is GM Technology Safe and Precise?
In his reply (see the Icelandic version here) the minister states that GM technology is more precise and safer than conventional breeding techniques.  Conventional breeding does not cross species and safety is guaranteed by the time honoured evolutionary process.  GM crops are created using a highly imprecise and unpredictable technology which cannot guarantee the stability of GM plants or the safety of foods grown from them (see website website section on GM technology).

Doubtful Statements on the Containment of GM Material
The minister´s statement that GM material from GM plants “neither spreads nor accumulates in soil or water” would be highly contested by scientists from all over the world, particularly in the USA (Union of Concerned Scientists) who emphasise the dangers of bioaccumulation of GM material in soil and water.  (See section on GM medicine crops.)

The statement that “no plant grows in the Icelandic nature that could possibly cross-pollinate with potential pollen from the GM barley” is debatable and possibly inaccurate. Conventional and organic barley are grown in Iceland for use as animal feed and human food, and their cross-pollination with GM barley can not be excluded.  What is more, barley is a close relative to grasses, Iceland´s main fodder and grazing crop, and experts have acknowledged that lyme grass (melgresi), which is widely used soil conservation plant everywhere in Iceland, may potentially cross pollinate with barley. Cross pollination between GM barley and those plants may become highly probable if GM barley is grown over many years and many hectares.

Safety of Icelandic Food Production Threatened?
In his reply, the minister states that these plans “in no way threaten the safety of Icelandic food production, neither directly nor indirectly.” This claim is not backed up by experience. The USA has been growing GM crops for longer than any other country in the world and it is a reality that GM food and medicine crops have escaped into the environment and contaminated animal and human food crops (see website section on the environment). The technology used to create ORF´s GM barley medicine crop is identical to the technology used to genetically modifiy most GM medicine crops in the USA (using the same vector, same promoter and same marker gene) and therefore cannot claim to be scientifically ‘safer’.  What is more the Icelandic climate has higher levels of wind and rain than most parts of the USA which will accelerate GM contamination via pollen, seeds, crops residues.

Environmental Impact of GM Medicine Barley
The minister refers to “the main experts in the area of plant breeding and gene technology within the agricultural sector” who “consider no remaining risk regarding the impact of such farming on the biosystem, beyond what may be the case with general impact of increased production of conventional barley varieties.”   This statement lacks meaning. Conventional barley poses no threat to the biosystem but GM medicine barley most certainly does. GM barley produces medicine proteins used to make medicines and industrial compounds which can damage human and animal health if consumed. What person, politician or scientist would think it is safe to have medicine or industrial proteins in their bread or cereal – or in their water supply – or in their Christmas goose? (See  website section on GM medicine crops.)

Icelandic Legislation Strict or Weak?
The minister also claims that “the licensing of GM crop production is governed by strict legislation”. The regulation which covers GM crop production in Iceland is very weak – far weaker that the EU regulation.  Iceland is part of the EEA, and will soon adopt EU regulation on GM crops.  Why has the Icelandic government allowed GM crops to be grown in Iceland in the absence of regulations which protect its public as carefully as the EU standards do?

The Experience of North American Farmers
The minister cites the experience of  North American farmers to show that GM crops do not pose any threat to conventional or organic crops.   The minister’s answer does not accurately reflect the experiences of North American farmers.  In Canada GM crops have caused such widespread contamination that it is impossible to grow organic maise, soya or oilseed rape (canola) in most of its regions, and GM contamination crises in the USA  (from both GM food and medicine crops) have resulted in massive legal cases and expensive food recalls (see website section on the environment).

No Answers on the Potential Impact of GM on the Image
of Icelandic Food Production
It is worth noting that the minister does not answer a question on the potential impact of GM agriculture on the image of Icelandic food production, export and sales. That image has been based heavily on references to the unspoilt nature and purity of the Icelandic environment. Given the wide ranging hostility to GMOs among the public in our main trading countries one may assume that this image will be tarnished and potentially wiped out if the plans to grow GM medicine barley are executed. Some respected experts in the area of agriculture and agricultural marketing have recently warned that this might happen.

The Agriculture Ministry Not Aware of GMO-Free Zones
Spreading Through Europe
 The minister states that the ministry is not aware of wide ranging regional limitations of GM crop production in Europe and  that such preservation action is not timely in Iceland. This comes as a surprise since such preservation efforts are raging  like a fire throughout Europe. Large regions are now declared GMO free, including the major part of Italy, Austria and Greece, Wales and significant part of South-West England. The same development is evident in Poland and France, and in Germany over 430.000 ha of agricultural land are now within GM-free zones. Moves in the same direction are also evident in North America. The minister does not either make a note of very recent resolutions passed by the AGMs of Landvernd - the largest environmental organisation in Iceland - and by BSSL - the country´s largest regional farmers´ union, both of which are pointing to that direction by requesting a moratorium on the outdoor release of GM plants until independent research into environmental effects and general debate have been conducted.

Icelandic Authorities Must Look into Other Nations´ Experience
Because Iceland will soon adopt EU regulations on GM technology, it seems only reasonable that the Icelandic government objectively examines other nations´ experience of GM agriculture, and understands and puts forward the case Europeans have made about the insufficient science and lack of safety regarding GM food and medicine crops. A summary of that case is well documented in this website (www.erfdabreytt.net).