Clean Up Lincoln Countryside and Clean Out NZs GE Labs

/in , , ,

Leakage of GE material from a Plant & Food Research containment facility should come as no surprise, but be a wake up call to Government that a major GE catastrophe is just a matter of time, according to the Soil & Health Association of NZ.

It was reported on Monday that Plant & Food Research was aware of another possible breach of containment at one of its Lincoln glasshouses, as Arabidopsis plants testing GE positive were found outside the glasshouse.

“GE containment facilities are only as good as human error or the structure allows,” said Steffan Browning spokesperson for Soil & Health.

“Plant & Food have been aware of such leaks for a long time and the Lincoln science community is well aware of previous containment ruptures.”

“With many GE experiments taking place in risky containment throughout New Zealand, also involving the genetic engineering of microbes such as E. coli or salmonella, it is also just a matter of time before new strains of those will escape containment.”

“MAF-Biosecurity New Zealand (MAFBNZ), now investigating the latest Lincoln GE breach, played down GE contamination risk at last summer’s Plant & Food GE Brassica flowering event, even though they found that the scientist in charge, Dr Mary Christey, had allowed flowering on more than one occasion.”

“Incredibly MAFBNZ then chose to say that pollen would not have blown more than 2 metres and was unlikely to have been moved by insects due to a lack of flowering plants, when in fact the renown Canterbury nor’ wester had blown over an adjacent tree and the flowering GE Brassica was amongst a sea of flowering plants.”

“Soil & Health wants testing of organic brassica seed saved from the Lincoln area last summer, to be included in independent testing for GE contamination. MAF wouldn’t last summer, so it is good to see some possible change in attitude as they actually get to test the surrounds of the latest GE breach.”

“If contamination exists, there is opportunity to clean up, but MAF keeping its genetically engineered head in the sand, just aggravates the risk to non-GE producers such as high value organics, from loss of markets,” said Mr Browning.

“New Zealand consumers and overseas customers like our clean green 100 % Pure Brand NZ. The risky unwanted GE products that Plant & Food, AgResearch and others keep pushing, fly in the face of clean, safe and desirable organic and sustainable production that the researchers could be putting so much more effort into.”

“GE field trials don’t fit and it is clear that GE containment laboratories don’t either.”

Soil & Health has a vision of an Organic 2020 that includes a clean green and 100% Pure GE Free Aotearoa New Zealand.

MAF-Biosecurity NZ and Plant & Food still not taking GE risk seriously

/in , , ,

MAF – Biosecurity NZ (MAFBNZ) appears to be letting go of New Zealand’s zero tolerance to GE contamination, according to the Soil & Health Association of NZ. Although genetically engineered (GE) brassica plants were known to have flowered in a Plant & Food Research trial in Lincoln, MAFBNZ has not undertaken any testing for contamination by GE plant pollen in the Lincoln area.

Soil & Health has asked for MAFBNZ to instigate comprehensive testing for GE contamination of brassica seed and bee products, especially honey, from the Lincoln area. They have also asked for the Environmental Risk Management Authority (ERMA) to immediately reassess and withdraw consents held by Plant & Food Research for GE field trials of brassica and Allium species (onions, garlic, leeks etc).

“Despite New Zealand exports and tourism relying significantly on our Clean Green, 100% Pure and GE- Free image, MAFBNZ have not even managed to get a testing regime underway at Lincoln to ensure the GE-free status of properties near the botched Plant & Food Research field trial,” said Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning.

“Zero tolerance is the appropriate regime regarding GE contamination in New Zealand and that is what MAFBNZ is tasked to ensure. Assuming wind would blow pollen just 2 metres and that bees and other insects would not pollinate plants more than 100 metres from a GE pollen source is ludicrous, yet that is how MAF has justified it not testing.”

MAF is currently responsible for enforcing compliance with any conditions imposed by the ERMA on using new organisms, and for managing any biosecurity issues raised by GE organisms at the border or in New Zealand.

Following the discovery of a flowering GE Brassica by Soil & Health in December 2008, MAFBNZ evaluated non-compliance with controls at Plant & Food Research – the Lincoln-based crown research institute containment facility where GE brassica plants had been growing as part of an approved field trial. MAFBNZ has said that the risk of bees carrying pollen away was extremely unlikely and by other insects as very low.

MAFBNZ Principal Adviser Doug Lush says the MAFBNZ investigation was wide ranging and included a thorough analysis of the possible range that any pollen or seed could have travelled.

He says MAFBNZ has conducted surveillance for brassica plants to a radius of 100m from the trial plot. No Brassica oleracea (broccoli type) plants, capable of forming seed during the risk time period, were found. He also referred to skant flowering and bee behaviour reducing the chance of pollen spread. However, Soil & Health argues that even if skant GE flowering at the time, it could have been prevented by committed MAFBNZ inspections and he did not take the necessary action to get the bolting plants removed, as had been specified in the trial consent.

“That flies in the face of the photographic evidence of a more than one GE flowering event, a strong floral sward during the December 2008 GE brassica flowering event and conditions at that time favouring the site for bee and other pollinator activity,” said Mr Browning.

“MAF have gone for the easy route of checking the Plant & Food trial site over the next few years in the very unlikely event that GE seed from the flowering plants remains. Yet as the site was cleaned up ahead of seed maturing, following publicity about the flowering GE plant, it is far more likely that GE seed has been formed beyond the site where pollen was transferred.”

“ GE brassica pollen has been shown to travel up to 26 kilometres in a British study. There was evidence of plenty of insect activity and strong winds at the Lincoln site at the time, so this possibility cannot be ruled out. Plant & Food’s own entomologists have identified some native flies as having the ability to carry 10 times more pollen as honey bees from the brassica pak choi.”

“In the failed experiment’s log, Plant & Food’s Dr Mary Christey recorded that monitoring (including for flowering) had to stop on at least one occasion due to high winds, and her own photographs show other GE brassica flowering events around that time. Wind events at the time of the December flowering toppled a pine tree between the GE brassica and intended GE onion trial sites, yet MAF’s Principle Advisor said, “Wind dispersal of brassica pollen is thought to extend only up to two metres”.

Denial from Plant & Food also continues with their spokesperson quoted this week as saying that Dr Christey’s photographs showed plants, “all at stages within the controls required for this trial,” yet the photographs obtained by GE Free NZ clearly showed some flowering and many plants had started to initiate flowering, a process known as bolting.

The ERMA consent condition (condition 1.8) explicitly states that “Brassica oleracea plants shall be prevented from producing open flowers in the field test site. Plants identified as initiating bolting must either be immediately moved back into a containment structure (control 1.4) or killed (control 1.12).

“Once again this begs the question, just how many GE brassicas flowered in the Lincoln environment over the last year? With proven flowering events, extensive testing for GE contamination must be carried out in the area. This now needs to continue beyond the current season due to MAF’s lack of action in collecting samples, as some seed set may now be harvested or fallen on the soil. Brassica seed can remain viable in the soil for several years.”

“Although Soil & Health applauds the end of the proven risky GE brassica field trial at Lincoln less than 2 years into its 10 year consent period, the Plant & Food GE alliums field trial approval must also be revoked.”

“Plant & Food have failed badly with the GE brassica trial, and remain unable to take ERMA’s consent conditions seriously. With an ERMA consent that includes allowing flowering of GE onions in supposed insect and wind safe structures at the trial site later this year the Crown Research Institute must stop its GE field trials immediately.”

“ERMA has enough information now to carry out a public reassessment on all Plant & Food’s GE activities and curtail the field trials quickly.”

“The stopping of these dangerous risks to New Zealand’s biosecurity helps maintain and build the clean green image that is more and more important for the sales of New Zealand produce.”

Soil & Health is committed to GE free food and environment and aspires to an Organic 2020.

References:

1) Overseas experience has shown GM crops threaten organics.
In May 2003 The UK Guardian newspaper reported UK environment minister Michael Meacher conceded that contamination from GM crops threatens organic food production. “The coexistence of organic and GM crops is a very real problem,” he said. see: http://politics.guardian.co.uk/green/story/0,9061,959641,00.html

2) Scientists have identified contamination risks in GM oil seed rape
The Guardian, October 14, 2003 (UK)
Government scientists have discovered that genetically modified oil seed rape cannot be contained by separating it from fields of conventional crops, after bees carried the pollen up to 16 miles (26km) away. A second piece of research has shown that once GM oil seed rape has been grown in a field, it would be 16 years before a conventional crop could be grown in the same field without fear of contamination of more than 0.9%, the threshold for claiming that the crop was GM free. The amount of gene flow rapidly declines over tens of meters and long distance transfer is “rare”. Transfer from one field to the next is around 0.1%, one in 1,000. Long distance transfer was blamed on bees carrying the pollen back to the hive and swapping it with other pollen – fertilising plants thought to be miles out of reach. The scientists concluded: “Complete (100%) purity cannot be maintained by geographical separation.” The second study involved the cross-pollination of rape with other wild relatives and spilt seed re-growing in fields the next year. Only rigorous spraying with weed killer every year for five years would reduce them to less than the 0.9% contamination level for the new crops to be classed as non-GM. If the field was not sprayed, the model predicted that the presence of the original variety in subsequent crops would not fall below 1% for 16 years. Web Link: http://politics.guardian.co.uk/green/story/0,9061,1062559,00.html

3) The Press, October 7, 2005 (New Zealand)
The skills of native flies in pollinating South Island crops may shed more light in evaluating the potential of cross contamination from genetically modified plants. A study by Crop & Food Research is monitoring the behaviour of native flies in arable plants and has found they could be major pollinators.

“If New Zealand was ever to allow commercial transgenic crops we must first examine any possibility of gene flow from these crops to other crops, weeds and native flora,” said Crop & Food Research entomologist Dr Brad Howlett.

Little was known about the role of native pollinators in transferring pollen in crops before this study. Until now it was assumed bees do most of the crop pollination and arable farmers have traditionally placed honey bee hives next to crops for this purpose.

Native flies have, however, been found in some crops carrying up to 19,000 pollen grains – as many as honey bees. On crops of pak choi, a bibionid fly was found in numbers 10 times more than honey bees and carrying the same amount of pollen.

The range of pollinators in crops, however, varies widely even on sites that are close together. In Central Otago it was found that two onion fields about 17km apart attracted completely different ranges of insects.

“To evaluate the likelihood of the movement of transgenic genes via pollen from GM plants, we must first understand the mechanisms that cause pollen movement,” said Howlett.

http://www.GEinfo.org.nz/102005/06.html

Web Link: http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,3436158a3600,00.html

Review shows that NZ is not ready for GE production – time for Organics to lead the way

/in , , ,

The Review of the Forty-Nine Recommendations of the Royal Commission on Genetic Modification released today by Sustainable Future, reinforces the deep concerns recently expressed by the Soil & Health Association of NZ about GE decision making and field tests.

Sustainable Future Ltd is a sustainable research and think tank organisation that has undertaken an extensive review of the 2001 Royal Commission on Genetic Modification’s warrant and recommendations, and the government level of acceptance and implementation of the recommendations.

“Particularly significant is the Reviews finding that although recommended by the Royal Commission in 2001, investigation into potential adverse effects of GE in the environment has been at a low to zero level, and protection for beekeepers and co-existence systems between GE and non GE producers has not been devised,” says Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning.

“The poor implementation of the Royal Commission’s recommendations means that once again a crisis of direction for Aotearoa New Zealand’s future with genetic engineering has emerged.”

“The new knowledge of major shortcomings in GE production, coupled with huge increases in demand for organic and non-GE food and fibre, allows New Zealand to use this opportunity to stop GE in its tracks and maximise a GE Free, clean green and 100% Pure brand in the world.”

The Sustainable Future review noted that the Royal Commission on Genetic Modification in 2001 had taken a middle path of neither totally accepting GE, nor totally precluding GE, but took a position called ‘preserving opportunities’ and formulated 49 recommendations that included allowing for non-GE producers to be able to maintain production, organic or otherwise, without fear of GE contamination.

“Lack of implementation of the Commission’s recommendations means that cannot happen unless GE development stops,” says Mr Browning. “The Royal Commission failed to consider the GE Free option fully and Sustainable Future have shown today that that opportunity is once again here.”

“The Sustainable Future report findings, that only 41% of the Royal Commission’s recommendations have been fully implemented and none of the ‘Crops and other field uses’ recommendations were implemented, shows government disregard for the 70% of New Zealanders who do not want GE food production here.”

“The decision making process by the Environmental Risk Management Authority (ERMA) has meant granting of GE field trials without the prior research anticipated by the Royal Commission, and the current application by Crop & Food that would allow flowering of onion crops and no soil studies ahead of the trial, is so likely to be granted that making submissions against it is a likely waste of time.”

Soil & Health has repeated concerns about the legislative gaps and submission and decision making process directly to senior ERMA officials, just three weeks ago.

Two examples of the 29 recommendations by the Royal Commission not implemented are (1) that GE crops need to be excluded from regions where their presence would be a significant threat to an established non-GE crop and (2) that MAF provide a strategy to ensure that honey is not contaminated with GE pollen.

“If the proposed GE field trials on onion, garlic, leeks, shallots and spring onions go ahead, these plants will go to flower and seed. Even if the flowers are covered, it is possible that bees may get access to them and that honey be contaminated. This could potentially spell the end of New Zealand’s reputation as a producer of excellent quality, GE-free honey,” says Soil & Health Councillor and former Crop & Food GE scientist Elvira Dommisse.

“As the Sustainable Future team have found that with a lack of preparedness for full release of GE organisms, due to insufficient Royal Commission recommendations being implemented, there is also the possibility of New Zealand pursuing GE Free food production,” says Mr Browning.

“ What is now required is a government commitment that recognised the unique GE Free branding opportunities that our country could enjoy, with organics poised to maximise that economic benefit.”

Soil & Health is opposed to genetic engineering in food and environment and has a vision of an Organic 2020.

New Zealand’s Fast Forward must be organic

/in ,

Yesterday’s government announcement of a new fund called New Zealand Fast Forward of $700 million for future research, development and innovation in the pastoral and food industries has overlooked the obvious need for organics, according to the Soil & Health Association.

“The vision is great but is too timid to say ORGANIC. The potential of this investment is massive if directed in a different direction from the past and it is encouraging that the Fast Forward Overview document says this is not about business as usual,” says Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning.

“Business as usual has had genetic engineering and soil life disruptors such as nitrification inhibitors touted as solutions to the mistakes of the past. Fast Forward with the same drivers is fast forward and out for New Zealand. Healthy vital soils and organic production is the way to a sustainable and vibrant future. With an organic focus we can future proof the economy as intended.”

As the Prime Minister’s statement said, “we heard late last year at the Primary Industries 20/20 Summit in Christchurch about the urgent need to lift economic and environmental performance across the primary sectors.”

“I also attended the summit, and the real message was not actually about the big lift in performance that would once again be unsustainable, it was a big NO to GE and a clear YES to ORGANICS, as the demographers who had identified market trends for the next two decades pointed out,” says Mr Browning. “Performance was pushed at the summit, but genuine sustainability was always part of the discussion. More does not necessitate better.”

“The Primary Industries 20/20 Summit identified the dominant market for New Zealand exports until 2030 as the first world baby boomers from North America, Europe and Japan, with discretionary cash who had a focus on ‘wellness’ and who wanted more and more of their food and fibre purchases to be sustainably and ethically produced. Good animal welfare practices, pesticide and GE free, carbon neutral, sustainable water use, and fair trade were identified as part of their preferences. Organics was identified as ideal.”

“So where is the organics in this $700 million equation? Where is the target of 10% organic production by 2012 with research and support to make New Zealand truly sustainable?”

“It appears that no one wants to upset the elephant in the room: the old guard of unsustainable primary production and the exploitive, unsustainable big corporates, with research institutes locked into the same mindset and a wasteful competitive funding structure.”

“The dollar for dollar government and industry arrangement doesn’t easily support the organic sector that has been economically disadvantaged in comparison with the conventional sector. The often unsustainable practices of the chemical-based conventional sector have externalised costs onto the community with pesticide residues, dirty waterways, land degradation and spoiling of our clean green market image. Comparative overseas countries seriously support organics for the benefits for environment, health and community.”

“Does organics only get a look-in if it is part of the giants in this new form of industry-government partnership? Can it be better than just intellectual property and nutraceuticals and GE?”

“Mr Hodgson yesterday quoted two R&D aims. The first was very positive on sustainability, and organics fits perfectly as a solution, however the second while sensibly advocating value adding, got lost in NEW ‘progress in new products, in food ingredients, functional foods, nutraceuticals, all the way to biologically derived pharmaceuticals’, and has missed what our markets actually want; natural, organic and GE free.”

“Mr Hodgson also discussed comparatives with Sweden, Finland, the Netherlands and Canada and extrapolated, “A primary production base can go hand in hand with a higher technology future.” However while none of those has quite the opportunities of New Zealand and its isolation to be a truly clean and green land, Sweden and the Netherlands have government initiated organic production targets already revised upwards. For environmental benefits, community health gains and to future proof our exports, it is time for government policy to have an organic production target,” says Mr Browning.

Organic farming is the clean green solution

/in , ,

Organic farming is the truly sustainable solution to our dirty record in agriculture, says the Soil and Health Association, in response to the recently released 2007 State of the Environment Report.

“It is imperative that we improve our environmental record in agriculture, so we can live up to our clean and green image, improve our waterways, soils, human and animal health, and also reduce greenhouse gas emissions,” says Soil and Health spokesman, Steffan Browning. “A lot of damage has been done, but we’re offering the solution. The way to make our farming truly sustainable is to go organic, and we need to grab this opportunity immediately with both hands.”

“There are increasing numbers of farmers out there showing that organic production methods are good for the environment, for animal and human health, and for the bank balance. Thanks to the Green Party’s agreement with the government, funding for the Organic Advisory Programme is giving a helping hand to farmers interested in converting to organics.”

Due to natural fertilising regimes, organically farmed soil holds onto nitrogen, virtually eliminating run-off into waterways. Soil structure is improved under organic systems, providing greater drought and flood resistance, and minimising erosion. Under organic systems, soil biology is healthier, and there is greater biodiversity.

Organic farming also offers a way of reducing our greenhouse gas emissions. The soil in organic production systems sequesters more carbon than that in conventional farming. Also, no synthetic oil-based fertilisers are used.

Demand for organic food is growing exponentially as consumers seek out produce that is residue-free, tasty and nutritious.

Soil and Health urges the government to encourage farmers to go organic, by increasing funding to help farmers convert, and setting an initial target of 10% organic production by 2012.

The Association encourages farmers and home growers alike to introduce organic practices, and has a vision of New Zealand being completely organic by 2020.

Therapeutic Products and Medicines Bill Rethink Time

/in , , ,

The government has an ideal opportunity for a rethink of New Zealand’s health choices, with the placing of the Therapeutic Products and Medicines Bill (TPMB) at the bottom of the Parliamentary Order Paper on Tuesday, according to the Soil & Health Association.

Community opposition to the Bill remains very high, and Soil & Health has received 1600 signatures through a modest appeal to members and friends over the last two weeks. Thousands have signed other petitions and hundreds attended last weekend’s Auckland rally against the TPMB.

Today, Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning presented Green Party MP Sue Kedgley with the indicative signatures. “We all understand the issues are complex,” he said, “but there is an overriding concern from our members that they do not want any regulatory system controlled from Australia and they do not want to lose the choice of the natural products that they have at present.”

“One signatory, a 71 year old great grandmother who has successfully used herbal products, vitamins and minerals since 1980, finished a message with, ’We are mature enough & dare I say it wise enough to keep it right in New Zealand.’”

“One method of achieving this may be through a New Zealand Office of Natural Health Products, such as proposed by the Natural Health Alliance,” said Browning. “Their draft concept has a regulatory structure for consumer protection while keeping compliance costs low for producers.”

“With nanotechnology and genetic engineering being used in the production of some so-called therapeutic goods, it is important that we have strict guidelines, but also that they have the support of and input from New Zealand consumers and natural therapists, through a structure such as suggested by the Natural Health Alliance.”

“Consumer choice is increasingly being removed and unwanted additives are being included because New Zealand bureaucrats are chasing free trade agreements and international harmonisation of food and health standards (through Codex, CER and FSANZ, WTO and others). Soil & Health suggests that each agreement maintains full domestic opt-out clauses, and has better local consumer input,” said Browning.

Please Find Below the Draft Proposal by the Natural Health Alliance.

TO ESTABLISH AN Office of Natural Health Products New Zealand (onhpnz)

Mission Statement

Our mission is to make New Zealand’s health care sustainable into the future by becoming a world leader in the regulation of Natural Health Products resulting in New Zealand being the country recognised as having the Healthiest People on Earth.

Goal for New Zealand

To develop and maintain a sustainable health policy based on a wellness paradigm. To establish an appropriate regulatory environment for Natural Health and dietary supplement products.

To establish a Centre of Excellence for Natural Healthcare that will optimise the health of New Zealand consumers; address the escalating costs of health care in an ageing population; maximise a New Zealand wellness brand and secure New Zealand’s place in the global market – all resulting in a sustainable, innovative Health and Wellness industry lead economy.

New Zealand Health in the Future

The Natural Health Alliance believes that optimised health and disease prevention through the use of Natural health products and health promotion can substantially improve the quality of life. One of the greatest concerns of the OECD countries is the escalating cost for health care in an ageing population, especially for medication resulting from fundamental weaknesses in the present illness model of Health policy. This model is predicted to cripple many countries and individuals. To this end, the Office should be committed to meeting the challenges of tomorrow by supporting research into the health benefit properties of low risk and low cost Natural Products (especially New Zealand herbs and flora)

Export Led Wellness Economy

New Zealand exports of natural products and ingredients have the potential to exceed imports. New Zealand due to its isolation has unique herbs and ingredients – some of which are recognised as world leaders. Having a unique Natural health Products (NHP) regulator will give New Zealand the opportunity to foster entrepreneurial companies exporting unique leading natural health products.

The Natural Health Alliance recommends that:

1. A separate Office of Natural Health Products New Zealand (ONHPNZ) be established that:

a) Is separate and independent from the Pharmaceutical Regulatory office,

b) Develops an appropriate risk-based regulatory framework that ensures consumers have freedom to choose quality natural health products and good information about those products to assist in making informed choices, whilst protecting philosophical and cultural diversity,

c) Is headed by a person with experience and expertise in Natural Health Products as the Canadians have done in appointing a Doctor of Naturopathy as head of the Natural Health Directorate of Health Canada; and

d) Is also staffed with personnel qualified and experienced in natural health products.

2. Twenty percent of ONHPNZ national health and medical research funding be directed towards research projects into natural health products.

3. A Centre of Excellence of Natural Healthcare be established with industry, Maori and consumers in partnership to focus on research, education and economics with objectives similar to those of the US Office of Dietary Supplements.

4. A cost-benefit study be conducted into the potential cost savings from greater use of natural health products be undertaken.

5. An on-line consumer information service be established in consultation with industry to provide consumers with balanced, factual information on natural health products.

6. A rebate for all natural health products and services be negotiated with private health insurance providers.

7. A Natural Health Products Advisory Committee be established to provide expert advice on natural health products and alternative health practices to the Minister and regulatory bodies.

8. An adverse event reporting system for NHPs to monitor trends and emerging safety issues and that such reports be assessed by a Committee of persons with knowledge and expertise in natural healthcare.

9. That the cost of the regulator be at least 50% subsidized by the New Zealand government as New Zealand will gain through the significant cost savings coming from a wellness health care system. Cost recovery system to recover only those costs that relate to regulatory services to the Industry.

10. Penalties and fines for breaches of the NHP standards to be set at appropriate levels that would be normal for this level of breach in accordance with similar used in the Food Industry in New Zealand.

11. Research into the health benefits of our Native Natural flora and fauna be sponsored by the Government to establish the active ingredients and confirm the benefits that have been discovered anecdotally over many years of use .The published research will help develop a good research based industry in New Zealand and the evidence to support the development of the New Zealand Natural Health Brand Internationally.

12. The government to promote the use of NHPs as a means of improving the nation’s Health and reducing the escalating cost of healthcare in an aging population.

Organic Means Certified Organic

/in , , ,

Soil & Health is celebrating that the Fair Trading Act is being interpreted to mean that products called organic should be certified organic, following the release last night of Food Standards Australia New Zealand’s Review Report, again recommending the introduction of folic acid fortification to all but organic bread.

“The recommendation appears to mean that foods labelled ‘organic’, but not certified to be organic, will not be exempt. FSANZ has said that foods labelled ‘natural’ will not be exempt as they are not subject to certification criteria. However organic foods are to be exempt, as there are certification criteria against which they can be checked”, said Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning.

The FSANZ Review states;

Exemption of wheat bread-making flour represented as ‘organic’ will allow the organic milling and bread industry to comply with fair trading legislation[1], which takes precedence over the Code.

Approach:

* FSANZ consulted the New Zealand Commerce Commission and the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission on the status of products labelled ‘organic’ and ‘natural’ under mandatory fortification in relation to fair trading legislation.

Conclusion:

* Under fair trading legislation mandatorily fortified foods would not be able to be labelled as ‘organic’ or ‘all natural’.
* It is proposed that foods represented as ‘organic’ be exempt from mandatory fortification.

Foods labelled ‘natural’ will not be exempt from mandatory fortification as there is no certification criteria for ‘all natural’ foods, and manufacturers are able to use labelling descriptors which indicate the type of product without misleading consumers.

“This is a long awaited and clear message that anything from pork to pickles, if it’s to be called organic, it is on the premise that it is certified organic”, said Browning. “This is significant for consumers who are too often sold products as organic, even though the producer is not subject to any checks that their claim is authentic, and comes at a time when access to organic certification has never been easier.”

“The recently launched Organic Advisory Program, managed through Organics Aotearoa New Zealand, is currently assisting producers with a subsidised consultancy to convert to organics. BioGro New Zealand, Organic FarmNZ, Demeter, Agriquality, or Te Waka Kai Ora, can all give consumer assurances not available with uncertified produce,” said Browning. “ The potential use of Standards New Zealand’s National Organic Standard as the minimum requirement for organic production also needs exploring,” he added.

The proposed changes to the draft variations to the Food Standards Code

a) require the mandatory addition of folic acid to wheat flour for bread-making;
b) exempt wheat flour for bread-making represented as ‘organic’ from this requirement;
c) retain the voluntary permissions that allow voluntary fortification of non-wheat breads and flours;
d) allow a transition time of two years for implementation.

This is expected to reduce the number of Neural Tube Defect (NTD)-affected pregnancies by a further 14-49 (or up to 14%) in Australia and by 4-14 (or up to 20%) in New Zealand. NTD’s often present as spina bifida.

“ Soil & Health is hopeful that the folic acid education program, to educate about spina bifida risks and prevention, also recommended by FSANZ, will put significant emphasis on a complete and preferably organic diet. Certified organic food disallows pesticides linked with birth defects, and nutritional properties including folate are generally superior”, said Browning.

Soil & Health had submitted to the FSANZ Issues Paper;

“Soil & Health has some degree of concern that foods labelled ‘natural’ may not be exempt, however unless those foods are reasonably certain to be pesticide and additive residue free, as expected with organic foods, the ‘natural’ claim may be spurious.

Foods labelled ‘natural’, are without the benefit of standards and certification processes as in the organic sector, however should a food supplier be able to provide evidence of the ‘naturalness’ of its product, for example wild harvested and organic ingredients with no synthetic additives, Soil & Health would expect that it should also be exempt.”

The exemption for organic bread will give all consumers a choice of a fortification free product while still accessing a healthy option.

[1] In Australia, Trades Practices Act 1974; In New Zealand Fair Trading Act 1986.

MAF dinosaurs must stop robbing sustainability budgets

/in , ,

Soil & Health welcomes the budget initiatives around true environmental sustainability announced yesterday, including the household sustainability programme and the public recycling scheme, and the $800 million investment quoted by Environment Minister Benson-Pope, “to take a big step towards New Zealand becoming the world’s first truly sustainable nation”.

However the big money will be sustainability rhetoric when it comes to primary production unless there are major changes within MAF Policy, according to Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning, adding, “The recent MAF Sustainable Land Management and Climate Change discussion document, contained the word organic just once in 90 odd pages, and that was in the glossary, showing a remarkable and critical level of sustainability ignorance coming from that institution.”

“Best practice organic systems support high yields with low off farm impacts and significant carbon sequestration achieved, as shown in research such as the US Rodale Institute studies, showing organic methods are far more effective than conventional methods at taking CO2 from the atmosphere and fixing it as beneficial organic matter in the soil.”

The 23-year study calculated that if 10,000 mid sized U.S. farms converted to organic production, it would be equivalent to taking 1,174,400 cars off the road, or not driving 14.62 billion miles.

Former British Environment Minister Michael Meacher told a 2004 Soil Association conference in Edinburgh, that that government must boost organics to help Britain meet its Kyoto targets. He also highlighted the Rodale Institute research, which also found that soluble nitrogen fertilisers in conventional farming destroyed soil biota that trap greenhouse gases.

“Current New Zealand dairy pasture research, theoretically in a sustainability direction, includes nitrite and urease inhibitors, with one inhibitor giving off cyanide in the presence of acid. What message does that give to our trading partners when we market the riches of a clean green land and to consumers looking to a truly sustainable future”, asks Browning.

A new research fund, allocated in Budget 2007, will bolster New Zealand’s international leadership position in helping the agriculture and forestry sectors respond to climate change, Agriculture Minister Jim Anderton and Climate Change Minister David Parker announced yesterday. The ministers said New Zealand needed and wanted to develop its role as a world leader in agriculture and forestry research on climate change.

“To be world leaders and maximise research dollar benefit, MAF needs to acknowledge and begin multiplying the best of organics significantly beyond current organic sector budgets”, according to Browning, “Brand New Zealand is waiting”.

“The Prime Minister put sustainability at the heart of the government’s agenda when she opened Parliament in February, yet some Ministries struggle with acknowledging the mistakes of the past and are set on more of the same.”

“The Soil & Health Association of NZ sees improved government support for the organic sector as an important solution to primary production climate change hurdles, and supports the Prime Minister’s aim of a truly sustainable New Zealand. But change the guard for a truly sustainable nation with an international point of difference: Nuclear Free, GE Free, clean and green, and heading to an Organic 2020.”

Improved market access good for NZ sustainability

/in , ,

Soil & Health is grateful for the efforts of New Zealand Food Safety Authority (NZFSA) staff in supporting BioGro New Zealand’s drive for better access for New Zealand organic produce into the demanding Japanese market.

It was announced on Friday that BioGro NZ Ltd received Recognised Foreign Certification Organisation (RFCO) status with Japan’s Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (MAFF).

Previously, New Zealand organic producers exporting to Japan needed approval by a Japanese certifier, as well as inspections in NZ by BioGro. BioGro’s new RFCO status with Japan MAFF will allow direct certification to Japan’s organic standard, JAS, using BioGro staff without the need of the Japanese certifier and the extra bureaucracy. NZFSA and BioGro had worked together for the outcome.

“Better access to high value organic markets means more environmentally sustainable New Zealand food production, and increased healthy organic food available for New Zealand consumers as extra production builds’, said Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning, “the sustainability benefits for New Zealand by improved organic market access at this time cannot be overestimated. Reports show fertilizer use in conventional production remaining at highly unsustainable levels, causing off farm pollution”, he added. “Organic production is significantly more sustainable”.

BioGro was formed in 1983 through the efforts of the Soil and Health Association, The Bio Dynamic Farming and Gardening Association and the Henry Doubleday Research Institute, to promote organic production and to develop a set of credible standards against which production of organic produce could be measured. BioGro remains New Zealand’s leading organic certification agency.

“Soil & Health knows that BioGro and NZFSA have worked hard to achieve the improved access, and sees the outcome as an example of how the organic sector and government agencies can work together,” said Mr Browning. “This is in contrast to the recent MAF discussion paper, Sustainable Land Management and Climate Change, that totally missed the opportunities afforded by organic production to address climate change mitigation”.

“It is important that MAF Policy acknowledge and embrace the opportunities that organic production can give New Zealand in added value, high premium returns while enhancing New Zealand’s environmental sustainability and market image”.

“Clearly NZFSA has appreciated those advantages. A truly sustainable New Zealand primary production sector with top value branding, will be achieved more easily when government embraces the Organic 2020 target”, said Mr Browning.

$2.1 million Organics Advisory Service Launch

/in , ,

The Soil & Health Association welcomes the launch of the Green Party initiated $2.1 million Organic Advisory Program, and sees the program as part of New Zealand’s aim of being a truly sustainable nation.

The Organic Advisory Program, operated through Organics Aotearoa New Zealand, is an outcome of the post election negotiations between Labour and the Greens, and will be launched on Thursday March 15 at Lincoln University.

The highlight of the program, according to Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning, is the ‘Smart Start’ service, providing growers a subsidised on-farm consultancy when considering conversion to organics.

Smart Start’s personalised focus is a significant initiative that for $200 allows producers access to a one-on-one consultancy on their own property, looking at the property’s potential for conversion to certified organic production.

While the Smart Start program will be available to most producers, Soil & Health hopes for a future even more affordable program, extending to the smaller and part-time producers that may supply only a roadside or Farmers Market stall.

The current criteria for Smart Start require the producer to have commercial organic aims in excess of $20,000.

“For consumer protection it is important to get all market stall-holders, who claim organic status, to become certified,” said Mr Browning.

Soil & Health is excited about other initiatives getting underway from the Organic Advisory Program, including the 0800-Organic Helpline, a website and various regional and sector initiatives.

Serious commitment by government can build on the Organic Advisory Program through even greater support and by implementing a target of 5% of land area in organic primary production by 2012, said Mr Browning.

Targets in several other countries have allowed significant growth in organics and sustainability benefits, while benefiting huge growth in international and domestic consumer demand for organic products.

For Soil & Health, this week’s launch of the Organic Advisory Program and, in particular, the on-farm Smart Start service are milestones towards an Organic 2020 and a truly sustainable nation.