|
Back to Social/Economic/Political
Hoempage
2 April 2003
Michael Meacher talks Organic Garbage
James Irvine
FRSE DSc FInstBiol FRCPath FRCPEd
Teviot Scientific Consultancy, Edinburgh
Teviot Agriculture, Cultybraggan Farm, Perthshire
(Filed 2 April 03)
©www.land-care.org.uk
The Westminster Minister for the Environment,
Michael Meacher, recently addressed a meeting of the Soil Association
in London. The content of his lecture was reported in the Farmers
Guardian of 28th March, 2003.
He said that the UK Government was looking for
UK farmers to produce 70% of the country’s organic food by
2010, in line with its Organic Action Plan (1).
More controversially he is reported as saying
that he wanted to see the amount of organic food served in schools,
hospitals and other outlets to reflect or exceed the amount of organic
food that was sold by the supermarkets. Indeed he is quoted as saying:
“If we believe in better quality food then we need to look
at whether school meals provide value for money rather than assessing
their cheapness. Food affects behaviour, and good food will have
wider social and cultural benefits”
While this statement is in itself to be applauded,
the suggestion that organic food provides better nutritional standards
is to be questioned. Organic food is generally more expensive than
food produced by conventional methods. The Food Standards Agency
has stated that it can find no evidence that organic food has any
nutritional advantages (2). Why then spend money
on expensive products that have no clear nutritional advantage as
stated by the independent watchdog?
Rather Mr Meacher is on an irrational green crusade,
no doubt aimed at the populist vote rather than competent science.
Indeed he was talking organic garbage.
By all means improve meals served in schools,
hospitals and other outlets. By all means re-introduce nutrition-based
standards for such meals, but let these standards be based on proven
science and not political hype.
To add to the illogical content of his address,
he is reported as asking at the same time for more information to
be available on animal welfare. That in itself is also to be applauded,
but animal welfare is not a strong card in the hand of the organic
livestock farmer (3, 4).It
would have been better if he had used the opportunity of lecturing
to the Soil Association to encourage their members to improve their
animal welfare standards.
Clearly Mr Meacher was promoting what he thought
was good for the environment by using his position to falsely suggest
that organic food had better nutritional value (which is at best
unproven) and that it was associated with better animal welfare
(which in some important areas it is not - indeed quite the opposite).
There is even some doubt that organic farming is necessarily better
for the environment, in view of the increased amount of nitrates
that it releases compared to conventional farming methods.
High profile figures, such as the Minister for
the Environment and Jonathen Dimbleby (president of the Soil Association)
should conduct themselves more responsibly by talking science, not
garbage.
©www.land-care.org.uk
References
1. DEFRA (2002).
Action Plan to Develop Organic Food and Farming in England.
http://www.defra.gov.uk/farm/organic/actionplan/index.htm
2. Editorial.
Food Standards Agency does not Provide Support for Organic Farming.
(Filed 14 November 2002, www.land-care.org.uk,
click
here to view).
3. “Organic
Farmers will have to get real” says Professor McKellar.
(Filed 23 December 2002, www.land-care.org.uk,
click
here to view).
4. Watkins,
Ruth (2002). Compassion for Health of Farm Animals 2003.
(Filed 31 December 2002, www.land-care.org.uk,
click
here to view).
Further Reading Recommended by Land-Care
Prof Trewavas and other speakers at LEAF Conference 26 September,
Battleby, Perthshire.
(Filed September 2002, www.land-care.org.uk,
click
here to view).
|
