Just picture the scene. British Parliament enacts a law requiring farmers to adopt certain agricultural methods, including the enforced use of some herbicides and pesticides. 4,000 farmers are reluctant to do so, and consequently have stringent Supervision Orders imposed upon them. More than 250 who steadfastly refuse to comply are forcibly dispossessed of their land.
No, this isn’t the plot of a film, but something that actually happened between 1948 and 1952 under actions authorised by the Agriculture Act of 1947, and it began the movement towards intensive farming that I (and many like minded individuals such as film maker Molly Dineen, who speaks in this issue) feel is in urgent need of reversal.
Back then, politicians were so impressed by the results of some herbicide and pesticide experiments, particularly those conducted by the Ministry of Agriculture and ICI in 1942 that, perhaps understandably, given the extent of knowledge at that time, they decided to race ahead with the burgeoning business of agrochemistry. The fact that some of these powerful chemicals could have military use added impetus to their development, rather than ringing alarm bells. Britain thus embarked upon a journey that has led directly to the anxiety now felt by many people about both the quality of modern foods and the ecological problems caused by modern farming methods. This is reflected on the one hand by enormous media attention to diet and the desire for organic food, and on the other by the influence of supermarkets demanding ever-cheaper produce from farmers. Result: many of our farmers are going bankrupt, and we have to import yet more food from overseas.
Some observers see today’s preoccupation with food quality and nutrition as an irritating fad that will soon pass because, they say, there is little solid ground for concern. Others, particularly relatives of those who died from new variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease (vCJD), bitterly remember that in 1990 the Government’s Chief Medical Officer Sir Donald Acheson said of BSE "beef can be eaten safely by everyone, both adults and children, including patients in hospital". It was six years before the government was forced to admit there was a link between BSE and the human form of the disease, vCJD.
Worryingly, it seems that little has changed since 1950, when a committee charged with examining the possibility of agrochemicals being detrimental to health found the evidence to be conflicting and inconclusive. Its main recommendation was the setting up of yet another committee whose remit would be to ‘advise generally’ on the possibility of health problems arising from the use of such chemicals, and that “a voluntary arrangement with the industries concerned was the best [solution] possible.”
This approach is echoed in aspects of the current controversy about genetically modified organisms. There may well be benefits derivable from them, especially for business, but the overriding principle underlying their development is ‘there is no scientific evidence of harm”, rather than “there is scientific evidence of their absolute safety.”
As Molly Dineen says on page 13, we need to start questioning more deeply food production methods and the politics of shopping. And this is where the public is in a position to make a difference—by raising our voices and voting with our wallets perhaps we can bring about change.