Keep trying, says Shropshire MP Owen Paterson after GM trials fail

The Conservative former Environment Secretary, who is a vocal supporter of GM crops production, insisted it was worth persevering with attempts to create wheat that could ward off aphids.

It comes after the controversial trial of "whiffy wheat" ended in failure.

It cost £732,000, and was aimed at producing a crop which replicated an aphid pheromone that wards off fellow plant pests from dangerous situations.

The bugs – such as greenflies – simply learned to ignore the smell, which was derived from the peppermint plant.

The cost of the project, which was conducted at Rothamsted Research in Hertfordshire, was dwarfed by the £2.24 million spent protecting the crop from anti-GM activists, and the findings reignited the debate over the use of genetic modification in British agriculture.

Professor Peter Mills, deputy vice-chancellor of Harper Adams University, near Newport, said current regulations around Europe meant it was unlikely that any fields full of GM crops would be appearing in Shropshire in the near future.

"The regulatory environment would have to change fairly significantly," he said.

But Mr Paterson said EU regulations are in the process of changing, and that he had supported that in his ministerial role.

He said one key message encouraged by supporters was the idea that GM crops are actually environmentally friendly.

Professor Mills said: "I believe there's a change in the current thinking in government in the UK, and the coalition government were moving to a point where they were open-minded about the benefits of GM.

"But a lot of it is based on public acceptability. Until the public are convinced of the benefits of GM food, it's probably not likely to happen.

"It's interesting that GM products are used in the production of some many drugs and medicines, so we collectively find it acceptable in some parts of our life, but food is an emotive issue."

Richard Yates, chairman of the NFU in Shropshire, agreed that public acceptance is key to GM crops making their way into farm fields in Shropshire – but supports the idea in principle.

Market forces, he suggested, dictate the extent to which GM foods could land on British dinner plates.

"We should be embracing GM technology," he said.

"But consumer confidence is paramount. If they told us we should be growing pink bananas I would.

"Confidence in the British farming industry is high at the moment, so we must do everything we can to retain that."

He added: "I do detect there's a change in the mindset regarding using GM technology in favour of it, and we must provide what the British consumer is confident in eating."

Campaign group GM Freeze claimed the scientists on the aphid trial in Harpendon in Hertfordshire had wasted taxpayers' money in a pointless bid to "outwit nature".

Rothamsted researcher Dr Toby Bruce said: "In science, we never expect to get confirmation of every hypothesis. Often it is the negative results and unexpected surprises that end up making big advances – penicillin was discovered by accident, for example.

"This trial has ended up yielding more questions than answers, but that means we have more work to do to understand the insect-plant interaction and to better mimic what happens in nature."

Interesting

Professor Mills added: "It still a relatively young technology, and the trial at Rothamsted is interesting.

"They have learned from these negative results, and now know they have to do something different in order to make these plants repel insects."

In laboratory tests the GM wheat produced the pheromone in significant quantities without its appearance or growth being affected, and successfully repelled aphids.

But in the field trial there was no statistical difference in the number of aphids infesting genetically modified and conventional wheat.

"It's being held back for superstitious reasons," said Mr Paterson, who last week wrote an article in the New York Post hitting out at none other than country rock star Neil Young for his opposition to GM.

"We have these incredibly advanced research institutions in the UK, and it's tragic that they can't use this technology.

"The most obvious crop would be blight-free potatoes. Blight costs an absolute fortune and requires an enormous amount of spraying."

He said: "When we had the terrible summer two years ago, one south Shropshire farmer rang me and said he was spraying his potatoes 15 times.

"The chemicals are legal, but that can't be good. There's a massive environmental gain in the reduction of spray, diesel and soil erosion. It would be remarkable if we could get a potato blight crop."