Scotland being 'left behind' on gene-editing, Tories warn

Those in the bubble of Scottish politics will be used to daily debates and disagreements over how policy decisions are being taken by the SNP Government compared to those south of the Border, or by the UK Government.

How disappointing that the latest policy area where the SNP appear to want to ignore the evidence and be different to the UK Government, is that of gene-editing.

My position is clear. Scotland should be following the lead announced last month in England by Defra to allow more trials of gene-edited crops. We must avoid a situation where farmers in Northumberland have an advantage over farmers in the Scottish Borders, where I represent.

I have repeatedly made this call in the Scottish Parliament, including to the First Minister Nicola Sturgeon and, indeed, on these pages last October.

This is an exciting, logical and innovative decision that will allow farmers and the wider agriculture sector meet the challenges that are coming rapidly into view. Take an example of something we all eat. UK scientists have used gene editing to reduce a cancer causing compound fond in toast. Acrylamide forms during bread baking and its presence is further increased when bread is toasted, and the darker the toast, the more of this carcinogenic compound it contains.

It saddens me that the SNP are unwilling to embrace progression and have talked up their wish to continue to follow EU rules. It is clear that choosing to align with the EU is a political decision, but to blur the lines between gene editing and genetically modified crops is misleading.

As I’m sure The Scottish Farmer's readers know, gene editing differs from genetic modification given it creates new varieties similar to those which would have been produced more slowly under traditional processes, whereas GM alters the make-up of an organism.

Why, then, did SNP Rural Affairs Secretary Mairi Gougeon muddy the waters when responding to her colleague Bill Kidd MSP, last week, who to be fair, did mention gene-edited crops in his question?

Her response referenced the UK Government’s decision, but then said: “Scotland’s policy on genetically modified organisms has not changed.”

Scotland’s farmers and scientists are in danger of being left behind purely because the SNP-led government is mixing up two issues. That simply isn’t good enough.

I have been in politics long enough to accept the SNP don’t like listening to me or my colleagues.What is more galling, though, is that they are not listening to experts and those in the industry.

Take NFUS’s crops policy manager, David Michie, who said the changes in England would help positively address some of the challenges agriculture faces.

Or former governor of the Crop Research Institute, Gordon Rennie, writing in The Scottish Farmer recently making a plea to the Scottish Government. Furthermore, he highlighted how the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation are backing the project as a ‘game-changer’.

If that’s not enough, perhaps Mairi Gougeon could pick up the phone to Defra’s chief scientific adviser, Professor Gideon Henderson, who said the gene editing tool would help make plant breeding more effective.

As Gordon Rennie also pointed out, if there had been any positive to take from the pandemic, then it has shown that scientific progress can be made at great speed.

These are the sort of opportunities Scotland should be seizing upon. We could reduce costs, reduce carbon emissions, improve water quality and boost food production.

Instead, this debate has, sadly, been clouded in too much typical constitutional grievance. Our agriculture sector deserves better and it is not too late for SNP ministers to change their mind.

I urge them to do so, otherwise our farmers will be looking on enviously to their colleagues down south.