Jodie Bruning

Bayer Fails to Overturn European Ban on Bee-Harming Pesticides

/in , , ,

The European Union’s highest court has rejected Bayer’s bid to overturn a European law which heavily restricted the use of bee-harming pesticides. In 2013 the European Union banned neonicotinoid, or ‘neonic’ use on bee-attractive crops. In 2018 the ban was extended to use on all outdoor crops, including annual arable crops, cereals and horticultural crops.

The General Court decision, released Thursday, is welcomed by the Soil & Health Association. This decision follows a prior bid by Bayer and Syngenta which had also failed to overturn the law.

The regulation relates to the ‘neonic’ insecticides clothianidin, thiamethoxam or imidacloprid; and applies to foliar sprays, soil treatments or seed treatments traditionally used in the growing period following winter.

Bayer’s appeal primarily argued that the European Union had not applied the precautionary principle properly and should have instead, engaged in a comprehensive risk assessment.

The precautionary principle is used when science has identified that an activity produces potentially dangerous effects, but where uncertainty remains about the extent of the risk.

The General Court of the European Union rejected Bayer’s argument, stating that an ‘exhaustive risk assessment cannot be required in a situation where the precautionary principle is applied, which equates to a situation in which there is scientific uncertainty’.

The Soil and Health spokesperson for pesticides, Jodie Bruning stated ‘This is an important finding. When we have technologies such as pesticides, interacting with environmental or human health, the decisions we take must very often be precautionary. Harm that results in death, or the dying out of a species often occurs as a result of multiple indirect effects. For honeybees, pesticides and environmental stressors interact. Over time this harm adds up to reduce resilience, causing honeybee deaths. 

‘The precautionary principle is important, because there is very rarely a single ‘smoking gun’ which can be traced and then blamed, for bee die-offs or colony collapse. We know that these insecticides last a long time in soil and water. We know they harm baby bee development, and impair flight as well as navigation. We can see that neonics reduce the capacity for bees to protect themselves from pathogenic viruses and the varroa mite.’

‘Recent testing shows we have concerningly high levels of neonics in New Zealand soils. We don’t have scientists paid long-term to research the health effects of neonics, so we don’t have scientists who can inform policy. Our farmers are buying unlabelled seeds, even for flowering clover. Farmers and orchardists do not know that the treatments they use are banned for outdoor use in the European Union.’

‘Because our scientists lack a mandate to research both human and environmental health effects, and the New Zealand Environmental Protection Authority relies on industry data to make safety claims, we have no authoritative expertise here. We are completely out of touch with best European practice.’

‘While the precautionary principle is only weakly applied in New Zealand, yet it has become a very important tool used by the European Union to protect environmental and human health.’

Jodie Bruning

Japanese glyphosate scare highlights lack of regulation in New Zealand

/in , , , ,

A blasé approach to glyphosate regulation in New Zealand threatens our international reputation and poses a risk to New Zealand consumers, Soil & Health Association spokesperson Jodie Bruning said today.

“Japanese authorities have now rejected five shipments of glyphosate-contaminated honey from New Zealand’.

“New Zealand needs to take glyphosate contamination seriously. The International Agency for Cancer has recognised glyphosate as a probable carcinogen. Bayer, the producer of Roundup, has already paid over NZ$15 billion NZD to nearly 100,000 individuals around the world who developed cancer after being exposed to glyphosate-based herbicides.

“We support Apiculture New Zealand’s call to have a national conversation.

‘We believe the New Zealand government can adopt a more nuanced approach to glyphosate. This is not an all or nothing conversation. Farmers can still have access, but glyphosate can be more cautiously regulated to ensure premium exporters don’t get nasty surprises like the honey exporters have received with these rejected shipments.

Controls have been placed on honey exporters by MPI following Japan’s announcement that glyphosate residue had been found above the allowable limit. Jodie Bruning says these controls are necessary, but continue to place the burden of responsibility on the honey industry.

“It’s not the beekeepers or honey industry’s fault that glyphosate regulation in New Zealand is so poor.

“We don’t have prudent controls on the use of glyphosate in New Zealand and it’s time we realised that consumers who care about food, care that it is not contaminated with a probable carcinogen.

“Glyphosate is a contaminant and a health risk. Whatever we do to protect our export markets will ultimately protect our freshwater, our soils and our families.

Concerns remain on improved Organic Products Bill 

/in , , ,

Concerns for the future of New Zealand’s domestic organic industry have dampened enthusiasm for the Organic Products Bill which returned from Select Committee with some significant and useful changes, says the Soil & Health Association.

“We represent the thousands of people buying, growing and selling organic products,” says Soil & Health’s general manager Pete Huggins.

“This bill will be a huge step forward for organics in New Zealand and it’s vital we get it right. Consumers, producers and retailers all want a robust system of organic verification that drives confidence and growth in organics.

“We don’t think the verification regime being imposed by MPI is the correct one. This was not the scheme we were consulted on and isn’t our preferred option. It poses risks around cost increases that the domestic industry will struggle to bear. We think MPI have misunderstood what is required here, and are failing to listen to feedback.

“We know the whole organic sector is committed to working with the government to make this Bill the best it can be. At the moment our main concern is to nurture and enhance the domestic industry under this new regime. It would be a tragedy if the incoming regulation hampered efforts to grow food more sustainably.

“Organics is booming internationally, and our export sector should thrive under this new system. But we need to see assurances that the domestic industry will be supported and not undermined through increased cost and bureaucracy.

“The Select Commitee has already improved the bill significantly and we look forward to engaging with the government further.”

Green Party organics policy adds vital ingredient to national debate on the environment

/in , , , ,

“It’s encouraging to see the Green Party reinforce their commitment to organic agriculture from their position in government,” says Jenny Lux, spokesperson for the Soil & Health Association, New Zealand’s largest organic membership organisation.

“We’d like to see all political parties exploring the opportunities regenerative organic agriculture offers in terms of environmental protection, healthy food, and resilient communities.

“We think the Green Party’s policy of creating a New Zealand sustainable food certification could finally help us meet our ‘100% Pure’ aspiration as a nation.

“However, a national accreditation would only work if it was based on measuring outcomes and met the standards for regenerative organic agriculture already recognised worldwide

“We also welcome the policy of capital investment and other support for growers wanting to transition to regenerative organic. The setup costs are often a major barrier to changing farming systems.

“Organics already earns export dollars at the same time as contributing to our Zero Carbon Act goals. Providing government funding for the organic industry and boosting funding for organic research and development is key to the future of this booming sector.

“At a time when people – consumers and growers alike – are increasingly concerned about health and environmental protection, it makes sense to be investing this way.”

Let’s go organic, Jacinda!

/in , , ,

26 September 2019

The Soil & Health Association is calling on the government to make good Jacinda Ardern’s statement to the United Nations that New Zealand is ‘determined to show that we can be the most sustainable food producers in the world’.

‘Tomorrow school children will lead the School Strike for Climate and we need to give them hope for their future’ said Marion Wood, Chair of Soil & Health. ‘Healthy, living soil is potentially the most important carbon sink our planet has. So we have to take action now to sequester the excess carbon from the air into soil and biomass. Organic and regenerative production methods, which maximise the build up of soil organic matter, are key to sequestering atmospheric carbon and keeping global warming within 1.5ºC.’

The Soil & Health Association points out that New Zealand has followed an intensive, industrial model of farming. This has resulted in a 16% increase in emissions between 1990 and 2015, largely due to an 88.5% increase in the national dairy herd and an approximately 500% increase in nitrogen-containing fertiliser.

As a result we are now reaching critical environmental limits, both in greenhouse gas emissions and biodiversity loss. Yet we have within our grasp a globally recognised system that can enable us to move towards carbon neutrality and provide resilience in the face of extreme weather conditions like drought – certified organic farming.

And all over the world consumers are demanding more evidence of ethical production and environmental effects of farming, so there is a ready market for certified organic produce that is genuinely 100% pure.

‘Let’s march tomorrow in support of our children’, says Marion Wood. ‘And then let’s take action to make Aotearoa the most sustainable organic regenerative farming system in the world. Let’s give our children hope’

Marion Wood
National Council, Soil & Health Association
022 032 7122

Worried about ‘free-range’ chickens? Choose organic!

/in , , ,

“The only way to ensure that the chickens you are eating are genuinely free range is to choose organic,” says Marion Wood, co-chair of the Soil & Health Association. “And what better time to start than during Organic Week which is right now.”

She points out that there is no enforceable industry standard for free-range farming. Farms are regularly audited by the Ministry of Primary Industries for food safety standards, but these standards do not relate to auditing free-range farming practices.

“What this means is that the scope of a ‘free-range’ label on your chickens is actually very wide. People think of happy chickens wandering in a field, but the reality is that the label ‘free range’ can be used by farms that confine their hens to small spaces or subject them to overcrowding. In 2014, it came to light that a farmer had been selling cage eggs as ‘free range’ for over two years – something that slipped under the radar because there was no authority checking such claims.”

But if you choose certified organic chickens, says Soil & Health, you know that the hens are looked after and their quality of life guaranteed because the farms are audited every year.

To get BioGro certification, farms must not have more than 10 hens per square metre in fixed housing or 16 per square metre in mobile sheds. Hens must have unrestricted access to outside runs and access to fresh grass or a forage crop containing a diversity of species.  Other organic standards are similar.

Marion Wood suggests everyone makes the change in Organic Week.

“Organic food is grown naturally without the routine use of synthetic pesticides or fertilisers. Certified organic chickens are healthy chickens with a good quality of life – something that the label ‘free-range’ alone doesn’t guarantee.”

 

ENDS

 

Contact: Marion Wood, 022 032 7122

Photo: iStock/Fotokon

Christmas comes early for the Organic Sector

/in , ,

“This is an amazing Christmas present for the organic community and we’re delighted”, says Bailey Peryman, Co-Chairperson for the Soil & Health Association, welcoming the Government’s announcement to progress with a national standard for organic production next year.

“People want clean, safe food, and are increasingly turning to organic foods and products but it’s difficult to be sure that they really are organic.  This legislation can provide certainty to everyone and build a clear definition of what the word ‘organic’ actually means.”

The national standard also opens a constructive forum for discussing the differences in practices across New Zealand.  We recognise that there are a small number of organic practices and inputs that are currently certified that other producers might consider harmful for stock and the environment. It is critical that we focus on the qualitative outcomes for people – providing clear information about what is in our food and accurate labelling to guide families in making good food choices.

New Zealand is presented with a great opportunity to learn from the failures of organic regulation overseas.  Primarily, that regulation needs to be managed by producers and consumers to maintain the integrity of organics within the standard.

Soil & Health has a long history of campaigning for these standards. It cautions that the adoption of a single National Organic Standard is holistic and must not disadvantage small growers and local markets.

“Many of our members are small-scale organic growers and producers who only sell their products locally, direct to their consumers and choose not to become certified due to the costs and effort involved. While all relevant businesses should comply with a new National Organic Standard, the framework of regulation needs to be proportional so not to unfairly disadvantage anyone” says Peryman.

“We are looking forward to working with Government and the sector to draft legislation which ensures that the oversight and integrity of organics is being upheld for the benefit of all”.

Bailey Peryman
Co-Chair, Soil & Health Association
021 122 7638
bailey@organicnz.org.nz
advocacy@organicnz.org.nz

 

Photo: iStock ID:184813025

Where’s our food from? Better labelling a step forward

/in ,

The blindfold will finally be lifted when it comes to buying food, but the Soil & Health Association says consumers need even greater transparency.

Soil & Health welcomes the passing into law of the Consumers’ Right to Know (Country of Origin of Food) Bill. The Bill, which requires food to carry country of origin labelling, passed with near unanimous support last night in Parliament. While footwear and clothing must be identified where they’re from, until now country of origin of food labelling has only been voluntary in New Zealand.

The Bill was a first introduced in 2016 by former MP, and now Soil & Health National Council member, Steffan Browning, as a Green Party Member’s bill.

“Transparent food labelling is fundamental in allowing people to make informed choices. Mandatory country of origin labelling is a step towards allowing consumers to do this,” says Steffan Browning.

The Bill however only applies to single ingredient foods such as fresh fruit, meat, fish and vegetables and Soil & Health says foods of multiple origins should be labelled too. This requirement could be brought in later through the setting of Fair Trading Act regulations.

“The Bill is a building block to more comprehensive food labelling requirements,” says Browning.

Soil & Health is also concerned that several single origin foods have been excluded from the Bill, including flour, oils, nuts and seeds.

“We particularly want flours and grains included, as most of the soy and maize products from the US are genetically modified. It’s absolutely necessary we have GE food labelling, but in that absence of enforcement we should at the very least be able to choose what country maize and soy products are from,” says Browning.

There has been widespread support for country of origin labelling. A survey conducted last year by Consumer NZ and Horticulture NZ found that 71% of Kiwis want mandatory country of origin labelling and 65% said they looked for country of origin labelling when they were shopping.

“There are many reasons why consumers want to know which country their food comes from. Some want to avoid GE food, food with pesticide residues, or food coming from countries with poor labour conditions or environmental and animal welfare standards,” says Browning.

Soil & Health has been campaigning for mandatory country of origin labelling for over a decade, since the government opted out of joining Australia in mandating country of origin labelling under the Food Standards Code on the grounds it would be an impediment to trade.

[ENDS]

Media contact:

Steffan Browning

021804223

Health not herbicides: time to phase out glyphosate

/in , , ,

Our public agencies must protect human health and ecosystems, and use rigorous independent science rather than industry data, says the Soil & Health Association. Soil & Health welcomes the release of a paper by the Green Party that exposes many flaws in an Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) report on glyphosate-based herbicides (such as Roundup).

The EPA commissioned a report last year that found glyphosate to be safe and unlikely to be carcinogenic.   Only months before, the world-leading authority International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) determined that glyphosate was a ‘probable carcinogen’.

The paper released by the Green Party last week revealed that the EPA’s conclusion was based on flawed science and data provided by industry. The paper dispels the so-called safety claims made by the EPA and highlights the urgent need to reassess the authorisation of products like Roundup that contain glyphosate.

“Many countries have banned the use of glyphosate due to its toxicity,” says Soil & Health chair Graham Clarke, who is a fourth generation farmer. “Even exposure to very low doses, below the risk analysis guidelines, creates a very real risk to human health. This paper raises serious concerns about the adequacy and quality of the EPA’s hazardous substances assessments.”

“Roundup in particular has been a cornerstone of chemical agriculture in New Zealand for decades but as each day goes by new compelling evidence emerges showing the downside of this product,” says Clarke.

“Soil & Health congratulates organic farmers, home gardeners and others who are using safe and effective ways to grow food and to control weeds, with no need for harmful herbicides. We’d like to see more government support for research into non-chemical alternatives to glyphosate as demonstrably the high chemical input system is not serving anyone in New Zealand well except the marketers of said products.”

Glyphosate is sprayed on numerous crops, including about 80% of genetically engineered crops that are bred to be tolerant to the herbicide. It is also used in New Zealand and overseas as a pre-harvest desiccant, so crops such as wheat are uniform at harvest time, and to make crops like potatoes easier to harvest. Residues of glyphosate (or its metabolites) are likely to be in many foods that Kiwis are eating every day, with the notable exception of organic foods. Buying certified organic foods is the best consumer guarantee to avoid residues of harmful chemicals such as glyphosate. The herbicide is also widely used in home gardens and public places including roadsides, parks and playgrounds.

“By deeming glyphosate safe and allowing for its widespread sale and use in New Zealand we believe the EPA has failed in their statutory obligation to protect the health and safety of people and communities, by preventing or managing the adverse effects of hazardous substances,” says Clarke.

Soil & Health believes that glyphosate should be phased out immediately.

“The use of glyphosate in public places, home gardens and for pre-harvest desiccation should cease immediately as these are the routes that expose most people to glyphosate. Other uses should be restricted and phased out as soon as possible,” says Clarke.

 

Links

Soil & Health’s policy on pesticides:

https://soilandhealth.org.nz/policies/pesticides/

Green Party paper:

https://www.greens.org.nz/sites/default/files/Published%20Paper%20-%20Why%20did%20the%20NZ%20EPA%20ignore%20the%20World%20Authority%20on%20Cancer%20-%20July%202017.pdf

IARC report:

http://www.iarc.fr/en/media-centre/iarcnews/pdf/MonographVolume112.pdf

EPA report:

http://www.epa.govt.nz/Publications/EPA_glyphosate_review.pdf

GE free

GE potatoes set to sneak into our food

/in , , , ,

The Soil & Health Association has serious concerns about another GE food line being approved in New Zealand – this time for six food lines derived from potatoes.

Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ), the organisation that controls food approvals for New Zealand and Australia, is calling for submissions on an application to permit GE potatoes for human consumption. The potatoes have been genetically engineered to reduce bruising, to reduce acrylamide formed during cooking, and to protect the potatoes from a type of blight.

Soil & Health is concerned about the growing number of genetically engineered foods approved for sale in New Zealand and the long-term and cumulative health effects of consuming them. While New Zealand does not grow any GE crops or animals, there are many imported GE ingredients in food for sale here.

“Since 2000 FSANZ has approved every single application for GE food lines, and there are now a staggering 71 different GE food lines approved for sale in New Zealand,” says Soil & Health chair Marion Thomson.

“An estimated 70% or more of processed non-organic foods for sale in New Zealand contain genetically engineered ingredients, but consumers have no idea because our labelling laws mean that almost all GE ingredients don’t have to be listed on the packaging.”

“In addition to human food, New Zealand imports large quantities of animal feed that is almost certainly genetically engineered, but again, not labelled as such,” says Marion Thomson.

While a FSANZ safety assessment on the GE potato application has not identified any public health and safety issues, previous FSANZ assessments have been shown to be incomplete, with an absence of biological studies on the impacts of the foods when eaten. Further, assessments have largely been reliant on industry assurances of safety, with no independent science to back up industry assertions.

“One of the main concerns about eating GE foods is that many have been grown with dangerous levels of pesticides,” says Thomson. “Many GE crops are designed to be resistant to pesticides. These crops are designated ‘safe’ for human consumption by FSANZ and the Ministry for Primary Industries, despite not having undergone adequate safety tests independent of the companies developing them.”

The best way to avoid consuming GE foods is to grow, buy and eat certified organic food, says Soil & Health.

The GE potatoes application is open for public submission until 7 July 2017.