By Susan Botting Local Democracy Reporter nzme 24 Feb, 2025 06:00 AM
Source: https://www.nzherald.co.nz/northern-advocate/news/northland-regional-council-slams-gene-technology-bills-threat-to-gmo-protected-zone/U47MLXJTQBFM5L5KRKQISZRWXI/
Deregulating gene editing technologies has wider consequences than the Government has considered, farmers and researchers say.
The contentious Gene Technology Bill is in its final week of receiving public submissions.
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon said the bill would help the agriculture sector in his state of the nation speech.
“Enabling gene technology is about backing farmers, it's about embracing growth, and it's about saying yes instead of no.”
“I [want] New Zealand’s scientists working on high-yield crop variants, and solutions to agricultural emissions, that don’t drive farmers off their land and risk the very foundation of the New Zealand economy.”
He also announced the restructuring of the Crown research institutes and said they’d prioritise commercialisation.
“I want us to commercialise our brilliant ideas, so that our science system makes us all wealthier, because we are going for growth.”
Minister for Defence and Space Judith Collins broke news of the bill in August last year.
“New Zealand has lagged behind countries, including Australia, England, Canada and many European nations in allowing the use of this technology for the benefit of their people, and their economies.
She mentioned that New Zealand’s biotech sector - think plant modification, vaccine development and cell research - generated $2.7 billion in revenue in 2020.
“The changes [will] allow researchers and companies to further develop and commercialise their innovative products.
“It can also help our farmers and growers mitigate emissions and increase productivity.”
The government has pitched the bill as a long-needed overhaul of old rules, but researchers fear they’ve swung too far in the other direction.
University of Canterbury professor of genetics and biology Jack Heinemann is amongst the academics calling the bill “radical.”
In a submission to the Health Committee, he and other academics allege the bill will lower the burden on regulators but “substantially” risk the health of people and the environment.
“We would be outliers in the international scene.”