MAF presentation on how "conditional release" may assist in achieving coexistence
Slide 1 – OverviewConditional release & "coexistence"
|
MAF is involved in this consultation process, arranged by MFE, because chapter 4 of the public discussion paper covers "conditional release" under the HSNO Act. If conditional release was written into the amended Act it could be a corner stone to enable the coexistence of GM and other forms of agriculture, horticulture and forestry in New Zealand.
Today, I would like to go over:
- what coexistence is and what it would entail
- the tasks MAF has been given for further work as part of the Government's response to the Royal Commission on Genetic Modification, and
- introduce the topics on which MAF seeks your views to help us with our tasks.
Slide 2 - Background"Our recommendations aim to encourage the coexistence of all forms of agriculture. the different production systems should not be seen as being in opposition to one another, but rather as contributing in their own ways to the overall benefit of New Zealand". (Royal Commission on Genetic Modification) |
The major theme of the report of the Royal Commission on Genetic Modification was "Preserving opportunities" and the Royal Commissioners were clear about what they thought this meant for different production systems (slide text). In the speech from the Throne in August the Governor General stated
"The Royal Commission on Genetic Modification recommended a precautionary approach which preserved options for the future. My government endorses that approach. For that reason the existing legislation with respect to the moratorium on the commercial release of GM organisms will not be extended but a strict regulatory framework will be maintained"
This implies that coexistence is what we are striving for and we are all in it together when it comes to making it work.
Slide 3 – What would coexistence entail?
In this presentation we will concentrate on plants because they present the greater challenge |
The Royal Commission concluded that:
"Genetic modification has a role in the development of food crops, forest trees, flowers and garden plants, subject to a range of controls designed to allow New Zealand to develop a mixed strategy of production systems"
Coexistence would mean that all forms of agriculture, horticulture and forestry could be practiced here with those involved ensuring that their operations affected their neighbours as little as possible.
Coexistence means balancing the rights of people who want to use GM organisms against the rights of people who don't want to be exposed to GM material in any form. If coexistence is going to work, then both sides will have to compromise and there will have to be cooperation between neighbours producing with different systems.
There could be different approaches to coexistence for different types of GM organism. Pollen movement is the most difficult because it cannot be controlled 100%. However, pollen will not always be an issue, for example with male-sterile lines of GM crops or crops that are harvested before they flower eg. GM onions. Other plants, such as GM carnations, which don't enter the food chain, raise different sorts of issues.
Conditional release could be used as a tool to assist developing coexistence. It could be used to specify:
- where a crop (or animal) could be located,
- the conditions under which it could be grown, and
- what kind of monitoring impacts would need to be carried out.
Slide 4 – What MAF is expected to do (1)Investigate and report on the practicalities of:
|
Slide 5 – What MAF is expected to do continued – (2)
|
The government has directed MAF to investigate and report on the practicalities of a number of tasks relating to coexistence.
I will not discuss the last three initiatives further here as they are being worked on outside this round of consultations, but we want your views on what you think the first two might involve.
Slide 6 – Industry code of practice for separation distances
|
The industry code of practice we are to report on is to ensure effective separation distances between growing genetically modified and unmodified crops. The Royal Commission recommended that such a code be established on a crop-by-crop basis taking into account:
- Existing separation distances for certified seed production in New Zealand
- Developments in international certification standards for organic farming
- Emerging strategies for coexistence between genetically modified and unmodified crops in other countries, and
- Identify how the costs of establishing and maintaining buffer zones are to be borne (buffer zones are the space between crops where no GM crop can be grown).
The existing New Zealand Seed Certification Scheme operates voluntarily. The scheme provides growers with seed of high varietal purity but gives no guarantee of this other than to certify that acceptable procedures have been followed to obtain this goal. It does require a minimum standard of physical purity. Isolation, or separation, distances are specified on a crop-by-crop basis. It might be appropriate to base the code on this scheme.
It might also be appropriate to maintain a register of plantings comparable to the Seed Certification Statistics produced by AgriQuality. This register records locations, areas and varieties of seed grown on an annual basis.
We would appreciate your comments on these matters.
Slide 7 – Industry code of practice for separation distances – compliance
|
We need to consider who will ensure compliance with the conditions set by ERMA if conditional release is granted to an applicant. Compliance when planting, growing and harvesting will need to be monitored if conditions are applied. Our current thinking is that ERMA would dictate the conditions surrounding the release of a new crop but some agency would have the task of approving individual plantings, at a farm level, recording these, and monitoring production and effects in the manner specified by ERMA. We assume that costs would fall on the grower and that compliance would be compulsory under conditional release, but may be voluntary under unconditional release. What do you think?
Slide 8 – Nationwide networks for coexistenceNation-wide network facilitating
|
We need to report on the practicalities of a nationwide network to facilitate cooperation and requirements for a mediation service. How practical is it to develop a nation-wide network in advance of any crops being released? Would this network be comprised of representatives of all interest groups? How practical would this be? Would it be better to establish networks on a regional basis when there is a regional interest in growing a specific crop?
Slide 9 - What is ahead of us?
|
Currently the main GM crops grown overseas are grains that resist certain insects or tolerate specific herbicides. Soybeans and maize have the largest acreages and it appears unlikely that there will be much interest in growing them here because our needs are different. However, counter-seasonal production of seed in New Zealand for the northern hemisphere markets could offer opportunities for a small number of growers.
We think the most likely applications to be lodged with ERMA in the short term are for insect resistant potatoes and herbicide tolerant onions. However, our economy is based largely on biological production systems and there could be many applications developed over the medium term, if market signals are favourable. We are interested in your views on what lies ahead.
Please remember that submissions are due to MAF by 15 November. We are seeking a practical system and need your advice to help develop it.
Please, by 15 November, have your written submissions with:
Graeme King Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry PO Box 2526 WELLINGTON
Contact for Enquiries
Dr Sharon Adamson
Manager,
Innovation Policy
Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry
PO Box 2526
Wellington
NEW ZEALAND
Phone: +64 4 894 0618
Fax: +64 4 4 894 0741
Contact this person
