Court ruling highlights the dangers of RMA reforms

/in , , , ,

A new court ruling highlights how the Government’s RMA reforms will ride roughshod over public participation in resource management and the power of councils to regulate the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) within their territories, says Soil & Health Association chair Marion Thomson.
On Friday the High Court rejected Federated Farmers’ bid to oppose court costs for its failed challenge to members of the public and councils that seek to manage the outdoor use of GMOs under RMA plans. Costs have now been awarded against Federated Farmers for a second time.
“Not only has Federated Farmers now been ordered to pay court costs of more than $10,000 to the Whangarei District Council and the Soil & Health Association, but the High Court found it was not acting in the public interest.
“In fact Justice Peters noted Federated Farmers ‘brought these proceedings because it was in its members’ interest to do so’.
“The National-led Government’s Resource Legislation Amendment Bill will jeopardise local authorities’ ability to manage GMO land use by giving the Environment Minister new powers to override council planning rules.
“These reforms threaten the economic sustainability of a wide range of agricultural export activities reliant on GMO-free status, and would override the ability of councils to respond to community concerns about the planting of GMO crops in their area.
“Friday’s ruling further entrenches the legal rights of councils and communities.
“Environment Minister Nick Smith believes genetic modification should be regulated on a national level by the Environmental Protection Authority under the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act (HSNO), not under the Resource Management Act.
“He is no doubt under pressure from Federated Farmers who choose to ignore the fact that while HSNO controls the introduction of new organisms (including GMOs), it is the RMA which oversees the environment new organisms are introduced into.
“Nick Smith is being mischievous in suggesting the management of genetically modified organisms under the RMA will stop access to the development of GMO medicines. He conveniently overlooks the fact that GMO veterinary vaccines are already permitted under the Auckland Unitary Plan.
“The Minister’s claims that GMOs were only ever intended to be regulated under HSNO have now been found to be wrong by both the Environment Court and High Court.
“Nick Smith must protect the ability of councils to act in the best interests of their ratepayers and local producers by amending his Bill to explicitly exclude using these new powers to regulate the release of GMOs.
“There are huge uncertainties around the adverse effects of GMOs on natural resources and ecosystems. The risks are large and consequences irreversible.
“If GMOs were to be released into the environment, they would be very difficult, if not impossible, to eradicate. There is also potential for serious economic loss to regions marketing their products and tourism under New Zealand’s ‘clean green’ brand,” Marion Thomson says.

GE Free from the Bombays to Cape Reinga

/in , , , , ,

GE Free Northland and the Soil & Health Association are celebrating the Far North and Whangarei District Councils’ decisions to retain precautionary and prohibitive genetically modified organisms (GMOs) provisions in their new District Plans.  This follows Auckland Council’s recent decision to retain similar precautionary and prohibitive GMO provisions in the new Unitary Plan.  The result of which is a GE Free northern peninsula from the Bombay Hills to Cape Reinga.

Whangarei District councilors voted unanimously last week to protect the community, local economy, and environment from the risks of outdoor uses of GMOs.  Their neighbours in the Far North voted a week earlier to introduce similar rules to their District Plan.

“These decisions, and our recent victory in the High Court, represent a huge win for Northland.  Our elected representatives are to be congratulated for their tenacity and commitment in supporting the aspirations of their constituents and protecting our biosecurity,” said Martin Robinson, spokesperson for GE Free Northland.

In June this year, GE Free Northland together with the Soil & Health Association gathered a panel of expert witnesses, mana whenua, and community representatives, to present evidence to the independent commissioners at the councils’ hearings on GMOs.  Both groups offered strong support for the District councils’ proposed precautionary approach to outdoor GE experiments, strict liability provisions, and outright ban on the release of GMOs.

“This is necessary because of serious deficiencies in the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act (HSNO Act).  Government agencies have a poor track record in containing outdoor GE experiments, and the law has very limited liability provisions for damage” said Soil & Health Chair Marion Thomson.  “The GMO policies they have now adopted are a sophisticated, collaborative, and fiscally prudent response.”

For more than a decade the Far North District and Whangarei District Councils have worked with the Auckland and Northland Regional Councils to plot a path that works for farmers, the wider community, and the environment.  The councils’ decisions to adopt the independent commissioners’ recommendations help protect the Northland region’s GM Free status, biosecurity, economy, and environment by requiring additional local protections that are not required by the national regulator, the Environmental Protection Authority, under the HSNO Act, with an outright prohibition of release of GMOs.

“Environment Minister Nick Smith has tried to portray local bodies as anti-science and anti-progress.  His claims are untrue, unjustly attempting to denigrate the robust course that our councils have charted,” said GE Free Northland’s Chair Zelka Grammer.

Despite the minister’s statements, the global Non-GMO food market is currently valued at US$250 billion, and trends show this is only going to grow.  It is clear that New Zealand producers benefit from access to this huge non-GMO market.

Soil & Health and GE Free Northland combined represent more than 10,000 members and supporters, including primary producers and consumers, both organic and conventional, who want to avoid genetically modified organisms and products made from them.

CONTACT

Marty Robinson

Spokesperson, GE Free Northland

022 136 9619

Marion Thomson

Chair, Soil & Health Association

027 555 4015

Zelka Linda Grammer

Chair, GE Free Northland

022 309 5039

High Court ruling on GE a win for democracy

/in , , ,

The High Court has today upheld the ruling that regional councils do have the right to decide on the provisions, policies, and rules regarding the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in their region.

 

The Soil & Health Association (Soil & Health) celebrates this landmark decision as a win not only in the fight against genetic engineering (GE) and keeping a clean green Aotearoa, but also for democracy as it allows community values and concerns about GMOs to be taken into account when drafting regional policy instruments.

 

Judge Mary Peters ruled in favour of the Whangarei District Council (WDC), Northland Regional Council (NRC), Soil & Health, GE Free Northland and others, dismissing the appeal on all questions raised by the appellants Federated Farmers of New Zealand (Federated Farmers).

 

“We welcome this landmark ruling,” said Soil & Health chair Marion Thomson. “It confirms the ability of all local councils to determine GE policies in their areas. We support communities around the country who want to keep Aotearoa New Zealand clean, green and GE-free.”

 

The decision comes after Federated Farmers appealed the Environment Court’s ruling in May 2015 that there is jurisdiction under the Resource Management Act (RMA) for local councils to control the use of GMOs via regional policy instruments.

 

Federated Farmers challenged that decision in the High Court in February this year where they argued that local government “has no role” in legislating about GMOs and that the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act (HSNO), not the RMA, is the overarching legislation that governs how GMOs are used in New Zealand.

 

Judge Mary Peters however stated in her decision today that the Environment Court “was conscious of the overlap between the RMA and HSNO but it was not persuaded that overlap required a conclusion that GMOs (and other new organisms) are required to be excluded from consideration in the promulgation of a regional policy statement or plan.”

 

Background:

Much of the New Zealand public today is still under the impression that New Zealand is a GE-free nation. The truth however is more complex.

1.     GE in the environment: The moratorium on GE organisms (such as crops and animals) in the environment was lifted in 2003, but since then no applications have been made for commercial release, although there are and have been GE field trials.

2.     GE in food and animal feed: While we do not grow any GE crops or animals, there are many imported GE ingredients in our food. As of July 2012 Food Standards Australia New Zealand has approved 53 applications of 71 different GE food lines into our country, and an estimated 70% or more of processed non-organic foods for sale in New Zealand contain GE ingredients. In addition to human food, New Zealand imports large quantities of animal feed which is almost certainly genetically engineered.

 

Significant gaps exist in the law around GMOs in New Zealand. There is a lack of strict liability for GMO contamination resulting from the release of an approved GMO, and no mandatory requirement for the Environmental Protection Authority to take a precautionary approach to the outdoor use of GMOs. Under the HSNO Act there is no requirement for ‘polluter pays’ to ensure companies causing unintended or unforeseen adverse impacts from GE crops of GE animals are held responsible. Due to these gaps in the law, a number of councils around New Zealand have been moving to protect their primary producers and communities by introducing precautionary or prohibitive policies.

 

The Northland Regional Council is one such council which, after receiving hundreds of submission from Northland ratepayers, district councils, Northland Conservation Board, iwi authorities, hapū and community groups, choose to adopt a precautionary approach around the outdoor release of GMOs in the proposed Northland Regional Policy Statement. The Northland Regional Council also identified GMOs as an issue of significance for Northland tangata whenua and an issue of concern for Northland Communities in their Regional Policy Statement.

 

Federated Farmers of New Zealand lodged an appeal with the Environment Court in 2015 opposing these precautionary GMO provisions in the Northland Regional Policy statement. Principal Environment Court Judge L. Newhook however found that there is jurisdiction under the Resource Management Act for regional councils to make provision for the outdoor use of GMOs through regional policy statements and plans. Since comprehensively losing the appeal (which it initiated) on all points of law, Federated Farmers filed a second appeal against the Environment Court’s decision with the High Court.

 

Soil & Health, GE Free Northland, Taitokerau mana whenua, Far North District Council and several other groups and individuals joined the appeal in the High Court as section 274 (interested) parties pursuant to the RMA, in support of respondents Northland Regional Council and Whangarei District Council. Soil & Health was represented by Dr. Royden Somerville QC and Robert Makgill.

 

Dr Somerville argued that Environment Court Judge L. Newhook was correct in his decision that the RMA and HSNO Act hold complementary and not overlapping roles. The two Acts offer different purposes and functional responses to the regulation of GMOs in New Zealand. Thus, regional planning documents can control the use of GMOs as part of promoting sustainable management under the RMA, taking account of regional needs. This argument has today been confirmed by High Court Judge Mary Peters.

 

Soil & Health and GE Free Northland combined represent more than 10,000 members and supporters, including consumers and producers, both organic and conventional, who want to avoid GE. Soil & Health believes that there is no economic, health or environmental case for GMOs. There are huge uncertainties around the adverse effects of GMOs on natural resources and ecosystems. The risks are large and consequences irreversible. If GMO’s were to be released into the environment, they would be very difficult, if not impossible, to eradicate. There is also potential for serious economic loss to regions marketing their products and tourism under New Zealand’s ‘clean green’ brand, if GMO land use were permitted.

 

CONTACT

Marion Thomson
Chair, Soil & Health Association
027 555 4014

 

Auckland to stay GE Free under new Unitary Plan

/in , , ,

The Soil & Health Association congratulates Auckland Council on its decision to retain the valuable precautionary and prohibitive genetically modified organisms (GMOs) provisions in the new Auckland Unitary Plan, which protect the Auckland region’s GE-free status.

Auckland Council is now the second local authority in New Zealand to officially become GE-Free in its local plan, after Hastings District Council decided last year to ban all outdoor use of GMOs in their district plan. Auckland food producers, like those in Hastings, can now brand their products as grown in a GE-Free food producing area.

“GE crops pose a serious threat to the investment made by primary producers in their GE-free enterprises,” says Soil & Health Chair Marion Thomson.  “GMOs are not allowed in food or farming according to organic certification standards, and there have been numerous overseas examples of farmers losing their GE-free or certified organic status because of contamination from GE crops.”  Non-GE crops carry a specific market-based premium that GE crops do not command.  According to the 2016 Organic Market Report, New Zealanders are eating and growing more organic produce than ever before.  Award winning Hawkes Bay sheep and beef farmer Simon Beamish recently stated: “As a farmer, exporter, I can confirm that consumers want GM free produce and that market demand is growing.”

Soil & Health, which has advocated for a GM-free New Zealand on behalf of its members and supporters for many years, joined with 26 other submitters to present expert witnesses, mana whenua, and community voice evidence to the Independent Hearings Panel at the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan hearing on GMOs last September.  Soil & Health supported the proposed precautionary approach to GMOs, and in particular outright prohibition of GMO releases.  “Including strong GMO policy and provisions in the final Auckland Unity Plan provides an important acknowledgement of community views and concerns,” says Thomson.

Auckland Council has decided to allow GMO research in controlled environments and the use of veterinary vaccines that contain GMOs as permitted activities, but outdoor field trials and the use of vaccines by people who are not veterinarians are discretionary activities.  Release of GMOs into the environment is a prohibited activity, which would require a plan change before being undertaken.

The new Auckland plan also contains a strict liability provision whereby consent holders for outdoor field trialling of GMOs will be held financially accountable for any adverse effects associated with the activity, for example through contamination, including clean up costs and remediation.  The Council, through the plan, further requires consent holders to provide a bond that would be made available for any costs of adverse effects associated with the activity.  This is important given there are limited liability provisions under the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act, as identified by Local Government NZ and a large number of councils.  The Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) is responsible for approving the outdoor use of GMOs in New Zealand; there is, however, no requirement for the EPA to take a precautionary approach to outdoor use of GMOs. One of the most important Environment Court decisions of last year was the finding that councils have the right to control the use of GMOs in their area under the Resource Management Act.  Federated Farmers since appealed that decision to the High Court.  The case was heard in Whangarei in February this year.  The decision from the High Court is yet to be released.

 

CONTACT

Marion Thomson

Chair, Soil & Health Association

027 555 4014

Whangarei Hearing

Councils and communities – a collaborative response to GE risks

/in , ,

 

Whangarei and Far North District Councils received strong support from the community for their proposals to protect their territories from GM releases this week.

 

The Soil & Health Association of NZ and GE Free Northland led a group of 14 submitters, presenting their case at a joint hearing on Whangarei District Council and Far North District Council’s proposed district plan changes for the outdoor use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs).

 

Soil & Health and GE Free Northland engaged independent expert witnesses to outline the case for the precautionary approach to GMO releases that both councils have proposed for their District Plans.

 

“Soil & Health has concerns about potential adverse impacts of GMO activities on the ability of the organic sector, tangata whenua and the community to provide for their social, environmental, economic and cultural well-being,” said Marion Thomson, co-chair of Soil & Health. “The proposed District Plan changes provide practical, commonsense ways of protecting communities.”

 

The plan changes would allow veterinary vaccines that use GMOs to be used without permits, but outdoor field trials would require council consent. Releasing GMOs to the environment would be prohibited for the life of the plans,or until such time as there is certainty as to how any risks can be managed.

Discretionary activities (outdoor field trials) would need to meet certain standards, including bonds to cover the costs of any unintended economic, health or environmental damage caused by EPA-approved GE experiments and the costs of ongoing monitoring.

“Government agencies have a poor track record in containing outdoor GE experiments, and the law has very limited liability provisions for damage,” said Zelka Grammer, chairperson of GE Free Northland. “The local community supports a precautionary approach to outdoor GE experiments, strict liability provisions imposed by local councils, and an outright ban on the release of GMOs in their patch, due to the serious risks to our biosecurity, unique biodiversity and environment.”

 

Many members of GE Free Northland are primary producers whose livelihood is from farming, horticulture, forestry and beekeeping, or home gardeners, all of whom could be adversely affected by GMOs.

 

There is no scientific consensus as to the potential effects of GMOs on the environment. Irrespective of the threat GMOs pose to the environment, GMO contamination risks significant adverse effects on social, economic and cultural values.

 

Soil & Health and GE Free Northland strongly support the right of communities to decide whether or not GMOs are released or field-trialled in their regions and, if so, whether any conditions should be placed on them. This was confirmed by the landmark Environment Court decision in 2015 that councils have the power under the Resource Management Act to control the use of GMOs in their regions.

 

 

Media contacts

 

Marion Thomson

Co-chair, Soil & Health

027 555 4014

 

Zelka Grammer

Chairperson, GE Free Northland

022 309 5039

 

Marty Robinson

Spokesman, GE Free Northland

09 407 8650

022 136 9619

Legal Team

Together we can keep Aotearoa GE-free!

/in , , ,

One of the world’s oldest organic organisations is now using crowdfunding to help keep New Zealand’s valuable GE-free status.

 

The Soil & Health Association of New Zealand, founded in 1941, has just launched a Givealittle page to appeal for donations from a wide range of Kiwis who want a clean, green, GE-free Aotearoa.

 

Recently, Soil & Health has been defending the rights of councils to control the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in their regions under the Resource Management Act.

 

Soil & Health’s new Givealittle page will help Kiwis contribute towards the costs involved in the High Court case held in Whangarei in February 2016. Soil & Health joined with others in the High Courtto protect Northland Regional Council’s ability to decide whether or not GMOs are released or field-trialled in Northland and, if so, whether any conditions should be placed on them. Soil & Health anticipates similar court cases in the future, so is also seeking funds now in preparation for these.

 

Any donations or financial support would be greatly appreciated and can be made viahttps://givealittle.co.nz/cause/soilandhealthstandagainstge.

Together we CAN keep Aotearoa GE-free!

 

 

For more information on the court case, visit: https://soilandhealth.org.nz/node/1102

For more information and GE and GMOs, visit: https://soilandhealth.org.nz/node/571

Legal Team

GE: it’s our right to decide

/in , ,

Communities should have the right to decide whether or not genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are released or field-trialled in their regions and, if so, whether any conditions should be placed on them, say the Soil & Health Association and GE Free Northland.

The two organisations again joined forces with Taitokerau mana whenua and others in court this week, responding to another case on the GMO issue brought by Federated Farmers, this time to the High Court in Whangarei. The judge’s decision is expected within a month.

“New Zealand has already seen inadequately contained GE field trials, in breach of the conditions of approval,” said Zelka Grammer, GE Free Northland chairperson. “We stand in support of the member councils of the Northland/Auckland Inter Council Working Party on GMOs, who are acting responsibly on their duty of care to the environment and constituents.”

“Federated Farmers claims to represent farmers, but many primary producers – organic and non-organic – are selling to high-value national and international markets that have zero tolerance for GE contamination,” said Marion Thomson, co-chair of Soil & Health.

Federated Farmers appealed the Environment Court decision in May 2015 that regional councils have the power under the Resource Management Act (RMA) to control the use of GMOs via regional planning instruments.

The Environment Court decision came about after Federated Farmers opposed Northland Regional Council’s proposed Regional Policy Statement, which included provisions relating to the use of GMOs in the region, and specifically included a policy requiring that a precautionary approach be taken to the introduction of GMOs.

Federated Farmers’ lawyer Richard Gardner argued in the High Court that central government passed the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act (HSNO) Act specifically for the purpose of controlling GMOs, and that parliament could not have intended for councils to duplicate that role under the RMA.

Soil & Health, GE Free Northland, Taitokerau mana whenua, Far North District Council and several other groups and individuals joined the appeal as section 274 (interested) parties pursuant to the RMA, in support of appellant Whangarei District Council. They were represented by Dr Royden Somerville, QC (senior counsel), and Robert Makgill (legal counsel).

Dr Somerville argued that Environment Court Judge Newhook was correct in his decision that the RMA and HSNO Act hold complementary and not overlapping roles. The two Acts offer different purposes and functional responses to the regulation of GMOs in New Zealand. Thus, regional planning documents can control the use of GMOs as part of promoting sustainable management under the RMA, taking account of regional needs.

The HSNO Act has a more confined role of regulating the granting (by the Environmental Protection Authority – EPA) of approvals to import, develop, field test or release new organisms as a ‘one-off’ regulatory transaction. The regulatory functions of the EPA under the HSNO Act do not allow for the provision of a regional approach to GMOs. That can only be dealt with under the RMA by regional councils and unitary authorities through policy statements and plans.

MEDIA CONTACTS:

Marion Thomson, co-chair, Soil & Health, 027 555 4014

Zelka Linda Grammer, chairperson, GE Free Northland, 022 309 5039

GE Goats

GE animal experiments: expensive, unethical failures

/in , ,

Experiments to genetically engineer animals in New Zealand over the past 15 years have proven to be expensive and unethical failures, says the Soil & Health Association, and must be stopped. Soil & Health commends GE Free NZ’s report ‘GE Animals in New Zealand’ for providing a clear overview of animal genetic engineering research in Aotearoa using sheep, cattle, and goats.

“The suffering that hundreds of animals have endured is totally unacceptable and goes way beyond the guidelines of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals,” said Marion Thomson, co-chair of Soil & Health. “This report catalogues all the documented deaths, deformities, abortions, sterility and numerous other health problems that the GE research animals have been subjected to.”

“We can’t afford to waste any more taxpayer money on these unethical experiments that have failed to produce any medical benefit,” said Thomson. “Instead we need to redeploy the skills of AgResearch scientists into sustainable and ethical research, such as into organic practices, that will benefit our farming, environment and health.”

The GE animal experiments have been completely unnecessary, as they have used animals as ‘bioreactors’ to produce therapeutic substances that are already available in other forms, says Soil & Health.

One point highlighted in GE Free NZ’s report is the fact that AgResearch has refused to release photographs of the animals involved in the experiments. “If these photos were released, people could see for themselves the needless suffering experienced by these animals,” said Thomson.

Together with Soil & Health’s promotion of healthy organic food and farming, the Association supports high standards of animal welfare, based on the ‘five freedoms’ that have been adopted by many organisations around the world.

Various Fruits

Celebrating NZ’s first official GE-free food producing region

/in , , ,

Hastings District Council’s decision to ban GE in their district is welcome news, says the Soil & Health Association. The just-released Hastings District Plan prohibits the release and field trialling of genetically engineered organisms, creating the first official GE-free food-producing region in New Zealand, and joining a number of regions around the world.1

“With a regional economy that relies on high-quality horticulture and agriculture and New Zealand’s clean green image, this decision makes sound business sense,” says Marion Thomson, co-chair of Soil & Health.

Retaining and strengthening the district’s valuable GE-free status is important for export and local food production. There is a strong and increasing demand for high-value, safe, GE-free food, and customers are paying a premium for it.

“The Council has acted on the wishes of 85% of the community,” says Thomson, “and the leadership shown by primary producer group Pure Hawke’s Bay has been absolutely brilliant.”
Soil & Health’s submission to the Council, in support of a GE-free district, drew attention to the 340-plus certified organic producers in the wider Hawke’s Bay. Organic producers would lose their certification if contaminated by GE organisms.

Soil & Health has made submissions to several councils around New Zealand in support of GE-free districts and regions. The Association has also invested significant amounts of money from members’ donations and participated in two landmark Environment Court cases.

One of the most significant Environment Court cases of 2015 was one in which Soil & Health and GE Free Northland led a group of section 274 (interested) parties in supporting Northland Regional Council’s precautionary wording on genetic engineering. Principal Environment Court Judge Newhook confirmed that there is jurisdiction under the RMA for regional councils to make provision for GMOs through regional policy statements and plans. [2]

This decision by the Environment Court was pivotal in the final decision made by the Hastings District Council. Soil & Health is supporting many communities around New Zealand – including Auckland Council, Bay of Plenty Regional Council, Whangarei District Council, Northland Regional Council, and Far North District Council – strengthening their GE-free status via district or regional plans.

“The GE-free movement is strong and growing, and community-led, similar to the nuclear-free movement of the 80s,” says Thomson. “New Zealand’s national legislation is inadequate to properly protect communities from the potential adverse effects of GE, so communities are acting to reinforce their existing GE-free status.”

CONTACT

Marion Thomson, co-chair, Soil & Health Association of NZ

027 555 4014

References

Links accessed Sept 2015

1.    https://www.hastingsdc.govt.nz/files/all/Proposed%20DP/Plan%20Text/29.1HazardousSubstancesAndGeneticallyModifiedOrganismsDistrictWideActivity.pdf

2.     http://www.organicnz.org.nz/node/1020

Notes

The Soil & Health Association of NZ is the largest membership organisation supporting organic food and farming in New Zealand, and one of the oldest organic organisations in the world, established in 1941. Our aims are to empower people and communities to grow, buy and support locally based sustainable, safe, GE-free and organic food in Aotearoa New Zealand. Soil & Health’s flagship magazine is Organic NZ, produced 6 times per year and sold nationwide.

Maize being poured

Maize spill shows risks of GE seed escape

/in , , , ,

New Zealand’s valuable GE-free status is under threat from biosecurity breaches, says the Soil & Health Association. Two spills in New Plymouth last week of maize imported from the USA show how it’s possible for genetically engineered seed to escape containment – and potentially grow.

“Well over 80% of maize grown in the US is genetically engineered, so there is a high likelihood of this seed being GE,” says Marion Thomson, co-chair of Soil & Health. “MPI has claimed that the maize is not GE, but we want to see the documentation, such as certification and test results, to be assured of this.”

New Zealand imports hundreds of thousands of tonnes of seed to be milled for stock feed. Much of it, including maize/corn, soy, canola and cottonseed, comes from countries where these GE crops are widespread.

“Have there been other spills of viable GE seed that we don’t know about?” asks Thomson. “The longer we continue to import this seed, the greater the risks are from contamination, and reputation to New Zealand’s clean, green image and primary exports – including GE-free maize.”

“New Zealand needs to be more self-sufficient and grow more of our own maize,” says Thomson. “Especially in terms of pastoral and dairy farming we need to focus on healthy, biodiverse pastures and reduce our dependence on external inputs.”

Soil & Health agrees with the majority of Kiwis that New Zealand should be GE-free in our food and environment. This is part of a healthy lifestyle, environment and economy based on sustainable, organic farming and growing.

CONTACTS

Marion Thomson,

Co-chair, Soil & Health Association of NZ

027 555 4014