Latest news with #GeneTechnologyBill
Scoop
2 days ago
- Science
- Scoop
Farmers Must Be Told The Truth About GE Ryegrass Performance
AgResearch has issued the findings of the first animal feeding study results of genetically engineered High Metabolisable Energy (HME) ryegrass that contains two foreign genes, sesame and rice, show that GE ryegrass is not a viable technical fix. The GE rye grass for this study has not has Environmental Protection Authority approval.[1] The AgResearch $25 million GE rye grass trials conducted from 2017-2022, found that the field trials results did not meet the expected performance end points. The GE rye grass died back when under competition and if the temperature went over 26C, overall, there was a yield penalty. The planned feeding trials to be conducted in 2020 had to be postponed as the GE grass did not generate enough fodder to feed any animals. [2] Information, received under the OIA, from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) said they had not approved the grass trial and AgResearch reported that the GE rye grass for the lamb study, GE rye grass for the lamb study, was grown in separate pots in controlled laboratory conditions in the Palmerston North glass house and turned into non-viable dry matter (hay silage) taking 18 months to collect enough to carry out the experiment. [3] [4] The 24 lambs were divided into two groups 12 fed GE rye grass and 12 as controls. They were fed for 11days in special pens to record their emissions. Compared to the controls the methane levels were 7% for the GE rye grass vs 4.4% for the controls.[2] 'How often do farmers feed their lambs dried unviable 18 month hay grown in laboratory glasshouse conditions, never," said Claire Bleakley, president of GE Free NZ. This does not match the successful proven alternatives available today and farmers are being sold a GE failure. Linseed oil added to supplementary feeds have a higher methane reduction rate Multi-species forage is also delivering greater reduction (13%) in emissions than GE trials and research has shown the New Zealand based company growing red seaweed for supplements can reduce methane emissions by 90%. [5] [6] [7] The Gene Technology Bill will allow exempted, unregulated, unmonitored GE trials and release into the environment and the food chain with no safety, accountability or regulatory oversight. The drafting of the Bill did not even consider the poor results and failures of the New Zealand field trials. 'This unapproved study is a waste of money and a misleading farmer promotion for a failed GE experiment,' said Bleakley 'GE rye grass cross contamination will affect performance of the pure non-GE grass seed, once released it cannot be recalled". References: [2] Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, [3] [4] [5] [6]
Scoop
2 days ago
- Politics
- Scoop
"Upholding Our Democratic Right To Be GE-Free"
Kaipara District Council (KDC) recently released its Proposed District Plan for public consultation, with an odd omission at a time when other councils are banding together to oppose extreme and undemocratic proposals in the controversial Gene Technology Bill. The KDC plan as notified is currently silent on the important GE/GMO issue. This is despite Northland's and Auckland's valuable status as a GM Free Food Producer Region and the inclusion of strong precautionary and prohibitive GE/GMO provisions, policies, and rules in the KDC draft District Plan 2022. During the previous round of public consultation, KDC received an overwhelming amount of supportive submissions on this important issue. Northland Regional Council (NRC) and other submittors are urging KDC to rectify the omission in the Proposed District Plan, with NRC noting that "the Northland Regional Policy Statement via Policy 6.1.2 directs a Precautionary approach to GE/GMO use where the effects are scientifically uncertain, unknown, or little understood but potentially significant." "Given the direction in the Northland Regional Policy Statement, the concerns of farmers and tangata whenua, and the need for consistency with adjoining District plans it is considered appropriate to reference and control these matters in the Kaipara District plan," said Martin Robinson, spokesman for GE Free Northland. 'It is critically important that KDC continue to work in a collaborative and fiscally responsible manner with all the other councils of Northland and Auckland. GE contamination does not respect boundaries, and known vectors including seeds, pollen, vegetative material, soils, waterways, animals, insects, machinery, and extreme weather events would not only cause problems in Kaipara itself but the wider Northland rohe," said Robinson. GE Free Northland is particularly concerned about the lack of strict liability to protect farmers and urges Northlanders concerned about outdoor GE/GMO experiments and field trials to make a submission to KDC's Proposed District Plan urging KDC to reinstate the GE/GMO provisions (by next Monday's 5pm deadline, 30 June 2025). "We also thank NRC and Far North District Council (FNDC) for their excellent submissions opposing the Gene Technology Bill, despite the complete absence of consultation with key stakeholders like councils and the tight time frame." "It was gratifying to read NRC's and FNDC's strong objections to the appalling and undemocratic provisions in the current Bill which would void existing District and Regional regulations and significantly reduce the local participation in decision making relating to gene technology experimentation," said Zelka Grammer, chair of GE Free Northland. (*1) "The extreme, impractical, and undemocratic provisions in the Bill must be removed as they would undermine many years of collaboration across Northland and Auckland's local authorities to bring about a cohesive planning regime that represents the values of Northland and Auckland communities(*2) and protects our biosecurity," said Grammer. As stated in its submission, NRC is of the view that regional and district plans should continue to play a part in the management of GMOs in Northland, and in doing so, continue to provide for the input of farmers and local communities into decisions that affect the region. GE Free Northland thanks NRC for pro-actively writing to all councils from south Auckland to Cape Reinga in the Far North (*3), proposing that the Northland/ Auckland "Inter Council Working Party on GMO Risk Evaluation & Management Options" be reactivated, given the threat posed by extreme proposals in the controversial Gene Technology Bill. (*4) Notes: *(1) The explanatory notes in the Gene Technology Bill state: "Subpart 9—Amendments to Resource Management Act 1991 Clauses 246 to 254 amend the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA). In particular, these clauses— • define genetically modified and Regulator (clause 247): • prohibit a regional council or territorial authority from performing its functions under sections 30 and 31 of the RMA in a manner that treats genetically modified organisms differently from other organisms, including in regional plans, district plans and regional rules (clauses 248 to 253)." All councils from south Auckland to Cape Reinga in Far North/ Te Tai Tokerau have precautionary and prohibitive GE/GMO provisions, policies, and rules- set up in keeping with the wishes of local farmers and other ratepayers, in order to protect our regions biosecurity, wider environment, economy, and existing GM free farmers/ primary producers, including conventional, IPM, regenerative,and organic. Hastings District Council has achieved outright prohibition of all outdoor GE/GMO experiments, field trials, and releases for the duration of the District Plan. *(2) Whangarei District Council "Genetic Engineering Review" webpage, detailing the good work of the Northland/ Auckland INTER COUNCIL WORKING PARTY ON GMO RISK EVALUATION & MANAGEMENT OPTIONS (formed in 2003 by Kaipara District Council and Whangarei District Council) "Three major reports commissioned by the working party have identified a range of risks involved with the trialling and release of GMOs. They also include approaches to managing those risks. GMO Reports [link to documents] Environmental risks · GMOs becoming invasive and affecting other species including native flora and fauna · the development of herbicide or pesticide resistance creating 'super-weeds' or 'super-pests' · long term effects on ecosystem functioning. Socio-cultural risks · effects on Maori cultural beliefs of whakapapa, mauri, tikanga · ethical concerns about mixing genes from different species including human genes · concerns about the long term safety of genetically engineered food. Economic risks · loss of income through contamination (or perceived contamination) of non-GMO food products · negative effects on marketing and branding opportunities such as 'clean and green' or 'naturally Northland' · costs associated with environmental damage such as clean-up costs for invasive weeds or pests. Associated with these risks are limited liability provisions under the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (HSNO) Act 1996. " ENDS *(3) 15 April 2025 NRC letter to all Northland and Auckland councils *(4) The operative Auckland Unitary Plan contains precautionary and prohibitive GE/GMO provisions, policies, and rules on both land and in the Coastal Marine Area (CMA).
NZ Herald
21-06-2025
- Business
- NZ Herald
Letters: Absence of economic evaluation of commercial GMO raises concerns
Photo / Food HQ Letter of the week Gene technology - at what cost? The Government is hypocritical in claiming it is over-riding local government powers for economic reasons when it is already doing so in the Gene Technology Bill without any economic risk-benefit analysis. The absence of an economic evaluation of the
Scoop
04-06-2025
- Business
- Scoop
Organic Sector Tops $1.18 Billion – Growth Slowed By Policy Gaps Despite Strong Global Demand
WELLINGTON, NZ – New data released today in the 2025 Organic Market Report shows New Zealand's organic sector has reached a record NZ$1.18 billion in value. This includes for the first time organic sales in the foodservice sector and reflects a 37% increase since 2020 (excluding foodservice), marking strong and sustained growth. Given the evidence of strong growth in global demand and the premium commanded by organic products, organics is New Zealand's highest-value and lowest-impact of primary production, delivering premium exports, healthier food, and stronger environmental outcomes. But the report also delivers a stark warning. New Zealand's organic sector lags behind the rest of the world due to outdated policies and lack of investment. The looming threat to the country's GE-free status also puts this success at risk. Key growth highlights include: The sector has grown from NZ$723 million in 2020 to NZ$1.18 billion in 2024 Exports totalled NZ$606.7 million, growing at nearly twice the rate of total primary sector exports. Domestic consumption reached NZ$572 million, including NZ$190 million from the foodservice sector, now measured for the first time. Certified organic land grew 4.3%, reaching 89,544 hectares Leading export categories include fruit and vegetables (40.3%), dairy (35.3%), and wine (12.2%). New Zealand's largest producers, including Fonterra and Zespri, are leading the way with premium organic milk and high-value organic kiwifruit, capitalising on consistent global demand for trusted, certified products. 'Organics is delivering strong returns and long-term market relevance,' said OANZ Chief Executive Tiffany Tompkins. 'But the sector is still working with one hand tied behind its back.' Far from being niche, organic production is now embedded in the strategies of some of our most successful agricultural exporters, with growing potential across other sectors including wine, meat and wool. Despite strong performances, the report highlights critical structural barriers that continue to constrain the sector's full potential: Only 0.6% of New Zealand farmland is certified organic, well behind global benchmarks, limiting the sector's ability to scale. The National Organic Standard remains unfinished, more than two years after legislation was passed and despite over a decade of sector advocacy. Without it, producers face uncertainty and inconsistent recognition in international markets. Organic equivalency agreements with key trading partners remain undone, delaying access to lucrative premium markets and adding compliance costs for exporters. Certification and regulatory costs are rising, particularly impacting small and medium-sized producers and discouraging new entrants. The Government's proposed Gene Technology Bill would allow the outdoor release of genetically modified organisms (GMOs), posing an existential threat to organic producers, jeopardising New Zealand's GE-free brand and risking the loss of access to premium organic export markets that prohibit GE contamination. 'This is a sector that's doing what government strategies call for - lifting export value, protecting the environment, and boosting regional economies,' said Rob Simcic, Chair of OANZ. 'But we can't lead the world with a regulatory system stuck in the past. If we get this right, organics can become a core pillar of New Zealand's future'
Scoop
02-06-2025
- Politics
- Scoop
Why Is The New Zealand Media Not Questioning The Implications Of The Gene Technology Bill?
Press Release – Lisa Er Despite the profound ethical, environmental, and societal implications, there has been a noticeable lack of critical scrutiny from the mainstream media, says Lisa Er. As the Gene Technology Bill advances through Parliament, New Zealand faces a pivotal moment in science, agriculture, and public health. The proposed legislation would significantly relax restrictions on gene technology, enabling broader research, development, and use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in New Zealand for the first time in nearly 30 years Yet, despite the profound ethical, environmental, and societal implications, there has been a noticeable lack of critical scrutiny from the mainstream media. 'It is plausible that political and economic factors are influencing the nature and depth of media coverage regarding the Gene Technology Bill,' says Lisa Er, author of a petition to 'halt the progress of the Gene Technology Bill and instead set up a Commission of Inquiry into the health and safety of people and the environment on behalf of citizens, to allow time for wider community and stakeholder consultation.' Key Concerns: Environmental Risks: The Bill paves the way for the release of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) into New Zealand's unique ecosystems, risking irreversible impacts on native species, biodiversity, crops, and the country's global clean, green brand. Lack of Public Consultation: The Government has failed to meaningfully consult with Māori, scientists, and the wider public, ignoring Treaty of Waitangi obligations and indigenous rights, community concerns about food safety, cultural values, and environmental protection. Threat to Export Markets: New Zealand's primary export markets, especially in Europe and Asia, have strict GM-free requirements. The Bill endangers market access and could jeopardize billions in export earnings. Undermining Precaution: The Bill abandons the precautionary principle that has underpinned New Zealand's cautious approach to gene technology, exposing the country to unknown long-term risks. Ignoring International Best Practice: Leading nations are strengthening, not weakening, their oversight of gene technologies in response to new scientific evidence and public concern. Insufficient Public Debate: The bill has generated over 1,500 public submissions, reflecting deep divisions and strong opinions across the country. The removal of labelling GE is of considerable public concern. Why has the minimal media coverage largely focused on official statements and the potential benefits, with little attention paid to the risks, opposition viewpoints, or the broader societal debate that is unfolding in submissions and community discussions? Risk Oversight and Regulatory Gaps: the bill will open the door to unintended consequences, including ecosystem disruption, cross-contamination of crops, and unclear long-term health effects Transparency and Accountability: Some have questioned whether the bill is being rushed or if consultation has been adequate, particularly given the timing of the public submission period over the summer holidays Media outlets have an essential role in holding lawmakers accountable and ensuring transparency in the legislative process, and these risks deserve deeper journalistic investigation and public explanation. A Call to Action for the Media: We urge New Zealand's journalists and editors to fulfil their democratic duty by: – Investigating the full range of concerns about the Gene Technology Bill, including those raised in public submissions. – Highlighting the ethical, cultural, and environmental questions that remain unresolved. – Providing balanced, evidence-based coverage that empowers New Zealanders to make informed decisions about the future of gene technology in their country. 'The Gene Technology Bill represents a generational shift in New Zealand's approach to biotechnology', says Er. 'The public deserves robust, critical journalism that examines not only the promises but also the very real perils of this legislation.' Lisa Er, founder of Lisa's Hummus Issued in the public interest to encourage transparent, balanced, and investigative reporting on a matter of national importance Petition with over 4,000 signatures Petition request: That the House of Representatives halt the progress of the Gene Technology Bill and instead set up a Commission of Inquiry into the health and safety of people and the environment on behalf of citizens, to allow time for wider community and stakeholder consultation. Petition reason: I consider the Gene Technology Bill has failed to follow sound and fair processes by not consulting enough with the public and other stakeholders. I believe there is inadequate consideration of Te Tiriti obligations, and insufficient requirements to protect people and the environment from the risks of GE contamination. A range of gene editing techniques would be excluded from regulation. This would mean GE products would enter the environment and food supply untested, unregistered and unlabeled.
