Prince Charles has been thrust into a fierce battle with the Government after warning that GM farming will deliver an 'environmental disaster'.

He is furious at 'cynical' attempts by the biotech industry and ministers to push genetically modified crops as the solution to Third World hunger.

Charles says the industrialisation of farming, which includes GM, is destroying the soil, polluting waterways and pushing out small producers.

He accused agrochemical firms of conducting a 'gigantic experiment with nature and the whole of humanity which has gone seriously wrong'.

A number of Labour MPs yesterday rubbished his concerns, suggesting he was 'Luddite'.

However, his views echo those of at least one senior government scientist and a recent UN commission which warned against the further industrialisation of farming.

The Prince said relying on gigantic corporations for the mass production of food would threaten supplies and the future of small farmers.

'If they think this is the way to go we will end up with millions of small farmers all over the world being driven off their land into unsustainable, unmanageable, degraded and dysfunctional conurbations of
unmentionable awfulness. I think it will be an absolute disaster.

'What we should be talking about is food security not food production  - that is what matters and that is what people will not understand. If they think it's somehow going to work because they are going to have one form of clever genetic engineering after another then count me out, because that will be guaranteed to cause the biggest disaster environmentally of all time.'

His words follow a meeting between Environment Minister Phil Woolas and the Agricultural Biotechnology Council, which speaks for GM giants such as Monsanto.

Mr Woolas, who is apparently being lined up by the Government as a GM cheerleader, said: 'There is a growing question of whether GM crops can help the developing world out of the current food price crisis.'

Labour MP Des Turner was the first to turn on the heir to the throne yesterday. 'Prince Charles has got a way of getting things absolutely wrong. It's an entirely Luddite attitude to simply reject this out of
hand.'

Another, Ian Gibson, said: 'Prince Charles should stick to his royal role rather than spout off about something which he has clearly got wrong.'

And Liberal Democrat Phil Willis, chairman of the all-party Commons science committee, said: 'While I admire Prince Charles's commitment to environmental causes, his lack of scientific understanding and his willingness to condemn millions of people to starvation in areas like sub-Saharan Africa is absolutely bewildering.

'The reality is that without the development of science in farming, we would not be able to feed a tenth of the world population, which will exceed nine billion by 2050.'

Those claims are challenged by the UN commission on the future of farming, which was chaired by Professor Robert Watson, chief scientist at Defra.

Prof Watson said the industrialisation of farming has failed to produce the food needed by the world. Consequently, some 850million people around the world go to bed hungry each night. The commission, which published its findings in April, specifically rejected GM as the answer to poverty and hunger.

It said it had led to the heavy use of chemicals, leeching the soil of nutrients and polluting waterways.

In a comment that directly echoes those of Charles, Prof Watson said: 'We are putting food that appears cheap on our tables but it is food that is not always healthy and that costs us dearly in terms of water, soil and the biological diversity on which our futures depend.'

The overwhelming majority of readers contacting the Mail Online website supported Charles's comments.

And Tory food spokesman Peter Ainsworth said: 'Charles is voicing concerns which many people share about the potential consequences of believing GM technology will solve the world's food security problems.'

The great experiment ...and the consumer backlash

The GM process involves inserting a foreign gene, which might come from the soil, a virus or an animal, into a plant to give it new supposedly beneficial properties.

Fish genes have been added to some tomatoes to help them withstand cold.

Most GM crops in commercial cultivation, such as soya, have been altered to withstand spraying by particular weedkillers. The plants thrive while weeds are wiped out.

But opponents argue the side-effects of the GM experiment are unknown and potentially risky.

Controversial: The genetic modification of food

In 1996 the Daily Mail's Genetic Food Watch campaign highlighted concerns for health and the countryside. Addressing consumer anxiety, the EU imposed a moratorium on the release of new GM crops and food in 1998.

A growing consumer backlash convinced retailers, led by Marks & Spencer and Sainsbury's, to banish GM ingredients from own-label products in 1999.

The UK Government has been a cheerleader in the EU for GM technology. It opposed the labelling of GM foods and supported U.S. government efforts to have the EU moratorium lifted.

In 2001, Tony Blair argued supporting GM technology was vital for Britain's reputation as a leader in the field of science.

In 2003, farm trials in the UK, the largest ever conducted, found GM farming harms the countryside. The spraying regimes for GM oilseed rape and beet, killed off weeds, weed seeds and beetles.

This, in turn, threatened to starve birds such as the skylark.

Government research published the same year showed GM pollen was carried up to 16 miles from farm trial sites.

The Government has drawn up plans to allow commercial GM farming but none has yet started. GM firms hope the first commercial crops - oilseed rape, maize, potatoes or sugar beet - will be grown commercially within two years.