no need to rethink

Phil Woolas said it was now down to the opponents of genetically modified food to prove it was unsafe.

However, on Sunday Mr Woolas went further, saying it was the government's "moral responsibility" to investigate whether genetically modified crops could help provide a solution to hunger in the developing world.

"But government ministers have a responsibility to base policy on science and I do strongly believe that we have a moral responsibility to the developing world to ask the question: can GM crops help?"

One.
Again, is Charles not part of the government ? ? Like who is Phil Woolas ? Some kind of expert on the situation ? ?

Two.
Speaking of moral obligation – Phil and all those who are gung ho to foist GM food on us, what of the moral responsibility to produce food with what we have? Some how it does not seem right to rant about the moral obligation to ‘investigate’ GM food – by planting it all over the world and exploiting the courts to allow big corporations to put a copy right on it – when there are hundreds of thousands of the best acres of land under cities and black top, being used for tobacco, for alcohol, for drugs, for recreation, for political ends, for hundreds of other uses that have nothing to do with a ‘starving world’ !

Phil. Why do you insist that it is perfectly safe to plant GM crops all over the place and give the big corporations patents and copyrights on what they ‘create’ (BAH HUMMMM BUG ! ! ! ! ) when YOU have NO proof whatever that it is indeed safe to do so ? ? ? Since when is it incumbent on the Prince to prove his point and not you to prove yours? Who indeed is the more morally responsible ? ? Here in Canada a guy breaks the law repeatedly and should have been locked up permanently long ago but we ‘honour’ him with a high award … Phil do you really think that you want to be counted with such a one as that ? “WE ARE right it is up to you to come up with the proof to stop us !!” That is moral responsibility ? ? NO it is NOT ! !

“government ministers have a responsibility to base policy on science” And Phil has NO idea what ever how many times ‘science’ has been wrong ! ! No. No. No. Government has a moral obligation to include all areas of human endevour to base their policy on. Government has a moral responsibility to be morally upright ! ! No bribes. No hiding behind what some corporate big wig says – especially when it is his own ‘science’ that is backing up his ‘claims’ ! ! Moral responsibility would be to keep GM severely inside and under the scrutiny of real science AND cross examination by other human endeavors that are part of the food chain. Moral responsibility would be to go after the big corporations where we know that they are way outside moral, ethical, kind, and decent human experience and prosecute them to the fullest extent of the law ! Moral responsibility is to take government back from the big corporations and the courts and even the so called law makers and give it back to the people. When I went to school democracy was govt of the people by the people for the people but now it is “he rules who has the most votes – as long as it can be made to look like he got them fairly and equitably”.

Phil, environment minister? That makes him a big enough expert to challenge the Prince ?