Letter: Protests can put lid on Pandora's box
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: Your article on the release of genetically modified viruses in Oxfordshire ('Scorpion's venom fuels genetics dispute', 17 May) highlights the importance of good communication between regulators and the public. It must be stressed that a similar experiment took place last year, and advertisements were placed in local newspapers, without a strong adverse reaction from the local community.
What has caused anger this time is that having decided to lodge an objection to the experiment, local residents were not told that the proposals were to go through a simplified procedure that cuts down the amount of time spent on scrutiny. By the time the Department of the Environment sent background information on the release, and the objectors had canvassed expert views, the Advisory Committee on Release to the Environment (which advises the Government on such proposals) had already given the experiment the go-ahead.
As a member of Acre, I find this entirely unsatisfactory. New procedures that are even simpler still, known as 'fast-track', will mean even further erosion of the time in which the public can comment on proposals. Unless handled very sensitively, these procedures could easily lead to reduction in public confidence in the regulatory system.
It must be made clear to people why the regulatory system is happy to handle some proposals more quickly than others, and exactly what is the scope for lodging objections. In particular, it should be made clear that, given sufficient new evidence, a consent for an experiment can be revoked at any time. Public representations and objections are never a waste of time.
Yours faithfully,
JULIE HILL
Director, The Green Alliance
London, WC2
17 May
The writer is a member of the Government's Advisory Committee on Release to the Environment.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments