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

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 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

Conflict of interest for new EPA head

/in , ,

The new head of the Environmental Protection Agency has been an open advocate of genetic engineering, and therefore has a conflict of interest when it comes to looking after the environment, says the Soil & Health Association.

 

Dr Allan Freeth starts his role as chief executive of the EPA in September. While managing director of Wrightson Group, Dr Freeth was described as an outspoken advocate of GE, and facilitated research into GE pasture species. During his time at Wrightson’s, the company bought Genesis, which has been involved in growing GE trees with ArborGen in the USA and South America.

 

“We are concerned that Dr Freeth’s appointment is part of a push for genetic engineering on several fronts in New Zealand,” says Marion Thomson, co-chair of Soil & Health. “The EPA is tasked with protecting the environment, and needs to apply the precautionary principle when there is any doubt – as is the case with GE. It is essential for transparent process that Dr Freeth’s views do not influence EPA decision-making.”

 

Dr Freeth’s appointment to the EPA comes at a time when the Ministry for Primary Industries is consulting on a National Environmental Standard for Plantation Forestry. If adopted with the current wording, the proposed standard would remove the right of local communities to determine whether GE trees could be released in their area – making the EPA the sole arbiter of decisions about GE trees in New Zealand.

 

This follows a ruling by Principal Environment Court Judge Newhook that there is jurisdiction under the Resource Management Act for regional councils to make provision for GE organisms through regional policy statements and plans. The ruling came as a result of a court case brought by Federated Farmers.Federated Farmers, which is now headed by another GE proponent, Dr William Rolleston, is appealing the decision in the High Court.

 

“Millions of taxpayer dollars have already been spent on GE field trials, including GE trees, with no positive results to date,” says Thomson. “Rather than go down the GE track, New Zealand has a great opportunity to maintain and strengthen our point of difference. We need to live up to our clean, green image with high-value, environmentally sustainable, GE-free organic farming and forestry. This is what markets around the world are crying out for.”

 

Soil & Health urges New Zealanders to have their say on the proposed forestry standard; submissions are due on 11 August.* The Association is proud that New Zealand has so far had no commercial releases of GE organisms, and that democracy and the public’s desire for a GE-free New Zealand have prevailed.

 

 

CONTACT

Marion Thomson

Co-chair, Soil & Health Association

027 555 4014

 

*Proposed National Environmental Standard for Plantation Forestry – submissions due 11 August 2015:

mpi.govt.nz/news-and-resources/consultations/proposed-national-environmental-standard-for-plantation-forestry

New wave of GE-free activism

/in , , ,

Pressure from the biotech industry for the government to relax laws on genetic engineering will result in a new wave of GE-free activism, the Soil & Health Association predicts.

This follows comments from some GE companies, and from the Treasury Secretary Gabriel Makhlouf in a speech at Fieldays that New Zealand is missing out on opportunities.

“Kiwis have fought hard to keep our environment GE-free, but if that is threatened, we will see massive protests,” says Marion Thomson, co-chair of Soil & Health. “GE farming and/or forestry will jeopardise our clean, green brand.”

Relaxing the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (HSNO) Act would be absolutely detrimental to our environment, our economy and to our communities. Experiences overseas have shown that GE crops have led to the rise of herbicide-tolerant ‘superweeds’, and the use of more and stronger pesticides. GE yields are no greater. In the USA and Europe, pig farmers using GE stock feed are seeing health problems and deformities in piglets, and finding that the pigs cannot breed; instead of a fetus there is just a sac of water.

“The trouble is that genetic engineering is inherently risky. Scientists cannot control where inserted genetic material ends up in the DNA,” says Thomson. “This can lead to unexpected outcomes. For example, many people are allergic to the pine pollen that is widespread around New Zealand, but imagine if GE pine pollen turned out to be even more allergenic, or even toxic?”

“Millions of taxpayer dollars have already been spent on GE field trials, with no positive results to date,” says Thomson. “Rather than go down the GE road, New Zealand has a great opportunity to keep our point of difference. Let’s ensure that we live up to our clean, green image and shift towards high-value, environmentally sustainable, GE-free organic farming and forestry. This is what markets around the world are crying out for.”

Media contact

Marion Thomson, co-chair, Soil & Health

027 555 4014

advocacy@organicnz.org.nz

REFERENCES

http://earthopensource.org/gmomythsandtruths/ – GMO Myths and Truths – an evidence-based document by two genetic engineers and a researcher

Pig farming references:

http://sustainablepulse.com/2012/04/24/pulse-news-2/

http://sustainablepulse.com/2012/07/06/agribusiness-farmer-loses-biz-gmos-promotes-organic/#.VX9FF6ats7A

GE Activists

Our democratic right to be GE-free

/in , ,

Media release from the Soil & Health Association and GE Free Northland

One of the most important Environment Court decisions this year is the finding that councils can control the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) under the Resource Management Act.

New Zealand’s oldest organic organisation, the Soil & Health Association, along with GE Free Northland, supported the Whangarei District Council in a successful defence of the right of local authorities to manage the use of GMOs in their regions, after Federated Farmers sought a ruling that Northland Regional Council had acted outside the law in taking this approach.

Since comprehensively losing the appeal (which it initiated) on all points of law, Federated Farmers has now filed an appeal against the Environment Court’s decision with the High Court.

In May, Principal Environment Court Judge Newhook found that there is jurisdiction under the Resource Management Act for regional councils to make planning decisions about the outdoor use of GMOs in their regions.

“Soil & Health was delighted to have our view confirmed by Judge Newhook,” said Marion Thomson, co-chair of Soil & Health. “We’re disappointed, however, that an organisation that supposedly represents farmers has decided to appeal the decision. Why does Federated Farmers want to deny Northlanders the right to manage what happens in their own region? Is there an application in the wings for a GE field trial or GMO release in Northland?”

“The laws around liability for GMO contamination resulting from the release of an approved GMO are non-existent,” said Martin Robinson, spokesman for GE Free Northland. “Because of the gaps in the law a number of councils around New Zealand are moving to protect their primary producers and communities by introducing precautionary or prohibitive policies.”

“It is vitally important that there should be a much-needed layer of protection, should there be damages caused by any outdoor use of GMOs,” said Mr Robinson.

“In our view, Federated Farmers is stalling for time and wasting money, while hoping for a law change.We hope that if the government is not prepared to change the law to protect innocent victims, it will at least recognise the rights of the regions to control the outdoor use of GMOs by using the RMA to include iwi and community aspirations in their Regional Statements,” said Mr. Robinson.

The government will need the support of the Maori Party, United Future or New Zealand First to change the law. GE Free Northland says it hopes these parties recognise how much support there is from iwi and other Northlanders for their councils to control the outdoor use of GMOs using the RMA.

“It will be interesting to see whether the government is prepared to abandon their unhelpful proposal to include a new paragraph in the RMA, spelling out that central government will block the work of local authorities to create a much-needed additional tier of local protection against the risks of outdoor use of GMOs,” said Mr Robinson.

Pure Hawkes Bay commissioned a Colmar Brunton poll in 2013 in which four out of five New Zealanders thought councils should be able to keep their districts GE-free using local plans.

“Consumers around the world are crying out for organic and GE-free products,” said Marion Thomson. “It makes economic and environmental sense to pursue clean, green farming, and not dice with risky GE technology that has failed to perform, and created problems overseas.”

Media contacts:

Marion Thomson

Co-chair, Soil & Health Association

advocacy@organicnz.org.nz

027 555 4014

Martin Robinson
Spokesperson, GE Free Northland
09 407 8650
022 136 9619

Zelka Linda Grammer

Chairperson, GE Free Northland

09 432 2155

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

Links accessed April 2015

Whangarei District Council page on genetic engineering:

www.wdc.govt.nz/PlansPoliciesandBylaws/Plans/Genetic-Engineering/Pages/d…

Previous Soil & Health media releases about the Environment Court case:

organicnz.org.nz/node/1020

organicnz.org.nz/node/1017

Previous GE Free Northland media release about the case:

web.gefreenorthland.org.nz/news/northland/00154-court-case-for-local-choice-about-gmos

Previous GE Free NZ media releases about the case:

press.gefree.org.nz/press/20150517.htm

press.gefree.org.nz/press/20150427.htm

GE or not GE? A victory for democracy

/in , ,

New Zealanders can take heart that it is now confirmed that regional councils have the right to make planning decisions about the outdoor use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in their regions. Environment Court Judge Newhook determined yesterday that there is jurisdiction under the Resource Management Act for regional councils to make provision for GMOs through regional policy statements and plans.

“We welcome this as a victory for sound resource management,” said Marion Thomson, co-chair of the Soil & Health Association of New Zealand. “The decision confirms our view that the RMA allows local bodies to manage any potential use of GMOs as part of their land use (resource management) planning function.”

The case was brought by Federated Farmers of NZ, who had lodged an appeal with the Environment Court opposing precautionary provisions for GMOs in the Proposed Northland Regional Policy Statement. Soil & Health and GE Free Northland coordinated a group of 12 other interested parties in support of Whangarei District Council and Northland Regional Council in the Environment Court last month.

As a starting point, Federated Farmers challenged whether there is jurisdiction for local authorities to make provisions for the management of the outdoor use of GMOs under the RMA. That challenge has now been rejected by the Environment Court.

“Soil & Health and GE Free Northland combined represent more than 3000 members plus consumers and producers, both organic and conventional, who want to avoid GE. Our view – and the view of a majority of Kiwis in survey after survey – is that genetic engineering is not needed or wanted in our food or environment,” said Marion Thomson. “The best path for New Zealand is to live up to our clean and green reputation by using GE-free, organic and sustainable farming methods that benefit our environment, health and economy.”

GE Free Northland spokesman, Martin Robinson, added: “Local authorities need to be able to respond to their communities’ aspirations. The laws around liability for GMO contamination resulting from the release of an approved GMO, for example, are non-existent. There are risks to the economy, the environment, biosecurity, and cultural and social values. Therefore councils may want take a precautionary approach and impose conditions on the outdoor use of GMOs in their area. This could include, for example, identifying areas where the use of GMOs is not appropriate, or establishing policies and criteria for assessing potential impact on other resources, such as existing organic farms.”

Several councils, notably in Auckland, Northland, Bay of Plenty and Hastings, already have precautionary or prohibitive wording regarding GMOs in their plans.

In the 2013 case Scion vs Bay of Plenty Regional Council, the Environment Court (also)allowed the Council to retain reference to GMOs in its Regional Policy Statement. Soil & Health also took a lead role among a group of section 274 parties (submitters) in support of the Bay of Plenty Regional Council’s retention of precautionary GMO references.

This latest decision by Judge Newhook validates and strengthens that decision, and confirms that both the HSNO Act and the RMA have complementary roles to play in the management of GMOs in the environment.

CONTACTS
Marion Thomson,
Co-chair, Soil & Health Association of NZ
027 555 4014

Martin Robinson
Spokesperson, GE Free Northland
09 407 8650
022 136 9619

Can we keep local control over GE?

/in , ,

Genetic engineering is again in the spotlight as the Soil & Health Association of NZ and GE Free Northland lead a group of interested parties in support of Whangarei District Council and Northland Regional Council in the Environment Court this Friday.

Federated Farmers of NZ lodged an appeal with the Environment Court, opposing precautionary provisions for genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in the Proposed Northland Regional Policy Statement.

This Friday’s hearing is set to hear argument on the preliminary question of whether local authorities can plan for the use of GMOs under the Resource Management Act.

Soil & Health, working in partnership with GE Free Northland, seeks confirmation of their view that the Resource Management Act allows for local authority planning documents to manage the outdoor use of GMOs.

“Soil & Health represents 3000 members, plus consumers and producers, both organic and conventional, who want a planned approach to GE that is integrated with the sustainable use and protection of other resources,” says Marion Thomson, co-chair of Soil & Health. “We support the right of local bodies to manage any potential use of GMOs in their area.”

Soil & Health and GE Free Northland have coordinated 12 other section 274 parties to present a joint case in the jurisdiction hearing on Friday.

In the 2013 case Scion vs Bay of Plenty Regional Council, the Environment Court allowed the Council to retain reference to GMOs in its Regional Policy Statement. Soil & Health also took a lead role among a group of section 274 parties (submitters) in support of the Bay of Plenty Regional Council’s retention of precautionary GMO references.

CONTACT
Marion Thomson
Co-chair, Soil & Health Association
027 555 4014