The government’s tight timeframe for updating the rules around genetic technology is a case of moving “too far, too fast”, says a Hawke’s Bay grower.
Speaking in a panel discussion at HortNZ’s annual conference in Tauranga, Scott Lawson said the sector had everything to lose including market access and grower returns if the rules are changed.
“I don’t want to see a horticultural industry and all the good work we have done crushed by poorly thought-through regulation that hasn’t been canvassed or discussed by the wider community.”
The starting point for the new legislation has to be that anything that puts at risk the trust and clean green image of NZ is too much of a risk to take, he said.
The government plans to end what is effectively a ban on GM and GE and create a dedicated regulator to ensure the safe and ethical usage of biotech and streamline the approvals for trials.
The government has signalled that it wants to have the legislation completed by 2025.
Lawson said NZ has to be aware of what no longer being GMO-free will do to its markets.
“Zespri, Fonterra and many companies leverage off this GMO-free position and internationally we have to sign GMO-free declarations on phytosanitary for apples going to India – all of these emerging markets are very concerned around that.
“We need to be very aware of what our consumers think internationally and that feedback we’re reliant on.”
It also raises ethical questions around whether growers could face future restrictions around what they can and cannot grow due to patents.
He said the European Patent Office is accepting patents for gene-edited feed proposals and when people start patenting nature’s biology, that limits what breeders called “breeders bounty” – the gene pool that growers choose to grow from.
It has caused a huge outcry among European vegetable seed growers who fear it will lead to growing restrictions.
It raises questions around who owns nature’s biology and whether NZ growers will have to recognise these patents under World Trade Organisation and other trade rules.
“We could end up selling our sovereignty,” he said.
Māori Kiwifruit Growers chair Anaru Timutimu said Māori growers have a cautious but open attitude towards having discussions around GE.
Timutimu said in his conversations with the Māori sector, they wanted protections in place for the original species.
“The whakapapa of that original species is really important.”
Turners & Growers chief executive Gareth Edgecombe said if GMO labelling has to go on a product, it will be real barrier for consumers globally.
He said NZ has a brand of high trust and high quality and the settings have to be gotten right.
It is such an important long-term step for NZ and it will still be decades before new genetically edited products will be in the marketplace.
“With that in mind, it’s more important that we get all of the settings right and bring everyone along and take our time to do that.”
BioTechNZ executive director Dr Zahra Champion said the regulations as they stand are 28 years old and are unsuitable for managing new technologies and need to be updated.
One of the main challenges in the new legislation will be how these new technologies are defined, she said.
“This is where the tension really is. It’s not about ‘Should we update the regulations?’; it’s down to those definitions.
“Where do we feel comfortable where we start calling it a GMO? I believe that is going to continue to be the big question.”
NZ is also fortuitous that it is not an early adopter of this technology, allowing lawmakers to learn from the mistakes of others.
The legislation will go to a select committee early next year followed by consultation. Champion urged growers to make submissions at that time.
“We do need to move forward, the regulations are outdated so we’re going to have to do something and we can’t just sit around and procrastinate and let those regulations sit there for another 20 years.”
