Appendix 1 Auckland Workshop Group
Immediate Issues
- listed by group during the opening discussion- in the order in which the points were raised .
- Primary issue – must be able to consume GM food without adverse health effects.
- People have different food and diet needs – these need to be recognised by the regulations.
- Consumer information must be available.
- ‘Normal’ is difficult to define.
- ‘Normal’ is a reference point – decide on risk subsequently.
- Regulatory agencies must have credibility and be seen so!
- Regulatory agencies must have the confidence of the consumers.
- Countries using Codex standards may not have their own national standards.
- What are the food trends? Politics of foods.
- Where are we going with food?
- May be issues to consider outside Codex’s regulatory role.
- Some issues lie outside the Codex activities that are a part of this discussion, eg. labelling, concern with food safety, people’s perceptions.
- Must provide consumer with information – must allow trade.
- Must set objectives – Codex has these objectives – (viz. meet food safety requirements and enable trade in food)
- Workshop must move on.
- Lack appropriate tests for GM foods – inadequate information on food composition.
- ‘Equivalence’ – concept is difficult to handle in practice – lack of knowledge of ‘normal’ and ‘equivalent’ food.
- Adequate tests for GM foods are available.
- GM modifications may change levels of components within a food but not change the actual components within a food.
- EU has a testing laboratory in Ireland. Using PCR testing.
- Allergenic problems are not dose sensitive.
- The growing environment impacts on the quality of the food.
- How do we look at food production holistically?
- We can affect what Codex does.
- Consumer sees international mechanisms of regulation as big and unwieldy – lack faith in process.
- Need to be proactive and tell New Zealand representatives to Codex what we need.
- Codex may need to look at better communication.
- Codex has a perceived bias towards food manufacturers.
- Average consumer hasn’t heard about Codex. Need to trust ERMA, ANZFAC etc.
- Scientists often on back foot when offering explanations.
- May need a direct link between producer and consumer without regulations.
- Developers of GM foods have done poor promotions.
- Information from opponents of GM foods not always accurate. Consumers are confused.
- Use or non-use of GM foods – depends on marketing perceptions.
- Need to base standards on sound science.
- Must provide information to the consumer.
- Standards must not be used to inhibit food trade.
- Adequate and comprehensive tests for GM foods are not available.
- Adequate tests for GM foods are available.
- Codex has a role to encourage appropriate levels of testing.
- Soybeans had ten years of testing before use.
- Difficult to test refined foods.
- Some non-GM foods released do not have extensive testing, e.g. nectarines, potatoes.
- Current tests may give a false sense of security.
- Are there adequate tools to deal with GM foods?
- Where is the ‘sound science’ on which to base decisions?
- Could substitute the word ‘evidence’ for the words ‘sound science’.
| © MAF 2000 |  |
|
| MAFnet Help | Important Disclaimer |
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
