The Scottish National Party (SNP) has left the door open to changing its opposition to gene-editing technology if the party gains a majority in the upcoming Scottish parliamentary elections.

Speaking at an NFU Scotland virtual hustings event on Thursday (22 April), Fergus Ewing – who is bidding for re-election as a member of the Scottish parliament (MSP) and to continue his role as rural economy secretary – suggested a softening in his party’s stance against the technology.

During a question and answer session, Mr Ewing and fellow prospective MSP hopefuls were asked to clarify their party’s stance on gene editing.

See also: Debate: Gene editing the pros and cons for farming

Mr Ewing told the meeting that the SNP had argued for a GM-free policy in the past, which “remains our policy”, but he noted there was a difference between genetic modification and genotyping.

“We should keep a watching brief on science. This is moving very rapidly in the EU as I understand it as well,” said Mr Ewing.

‘Follow the science’

He added that it would be wrong to “shut our eyes” to scientific advancement, which could offer benefits.

Mr Ewing said: “We have stressed that our policy is to keep Scotland GM-free and to have the reputation that comes from that as a natural larder, which is produced in accordance with best practice and nature.”

Scottish Conservative agriculture spokesman Jamie Halcro Johnston told Mr Ewing he was surprised by the apparent change of stance.

The Tory candidate for Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch, said: “I’m slightly confused because I thought that the Scottish government’s position was that gene editing was considered [to be] a form of GM and, therefore, they were opposed to it?”

Mr Halcro Johnston agreed that decisions on gene-editing policy should be “led by the science”.

He added: “There are so many challenges going forward in terms of food production and finding new ways of increasing produce, but also in dealing with some of the [crop] pests, etcetera, and making plants more hardy and the like.

“If we’ve got an opportunity to do that, and to do that safely, we all need to support that.”

Scottish Greens spokesman Mags Hall said her party recognises there is a difference between GM and gene-editing technology. But she urged caution over introducing new forms of technology, regarding the impact on health, the environment and the patenting of new tools.

Devolved issue

GM and gene editing is a devolved issue where decision-making is taken by individual parliaments. Both the Scottish and Welsh governments have stated their opposition to the cultivation of GM crops, arguing that there is no demand for the technology from consumers.

A Defra consultation, which closed in March, set out the government’s aim to break free from restrictive EU definitions, which treat the two breeding techniques the same.

The consultation document explained that gene-edited organisms do not contain DNA from different species, and only produce changes that could be made slowly using traditional breeding methods.

Genetic modification, however, involves taking a gene from one species and inserting it into another.

The government is still considering its response, but the expectation is that it will relax existing regulation within the next couple of years, allowing a greater uptake of gene editing by plant and animal breeders in England.