 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
The Royal Commission on Genetic Modification - submissionsInterchurch Commission on Genetic EngineeringSTRATEGIC ISSUES & OPTIONSSubmission The Interchurch Commission on Genetic Engineering (ICGE) outlined three possible strategic options. These are:
The ICGE supported the second option stating that there are advantages in a selective moratorium in that it would allow further research on environmental and safety issues and time to consider more adequately the ethical, spiritual and cultural issues. This could involve, for example, a moratorium on the development and exploitation of GM until such time as the Treaty partners have agreed to procedures that ensure the scientific community and its corporate or Crown agencies adhere to explicit principles which honour the spiritual beliefs and Taonga (treasures) of the people, in particular Maori as Tangata Whenua.
Furthermore, if the utilisation of GM technology and GMOs is allowed in New Zealand ethical and legal structures need to be established that help create a climate in which New Zealand’s use of the technology will:
The ICGE then observed global trends such as changes in climate, reduction in arable land and a trend toward monocultures. Other issues worldwide were submitted to be the high level of poverty, hunger and malnutrition and the prevalence of disease in many poorer countries. They submitted, therefore, that research in New Zealand and elsewhere should take into account these needs and large corporate companies and the profit motive should not dominate the direction of research. Furthermore, if there are international obligations that New Zealand is required to fulfil, the principle of sovereignty should take precedence in allowing New Zealanders to act according to their own ethical, spiritual and cultural values.
LAW & LEGISLATIONSubmission Regulation The ICGE submitted that research involving GM technology should continue to be assessed and monitored by ERMA. Approval by ERMA should include an agreement that companies/organizations/researchers be liable morally, legally and financially for damage to the environment and to consumers of GM products. Liability agreements for non public good research as required by Regional Health Ethics committees and the ARCI would be a guide here. It was further recommended that ERMA’s terms of reference be reviewed to ensure that adequate respect is given to the Maori point of view. It was also the opinion of the ICGE that in preparation for possible future commercial release of GMOs guidelines should be drawn up to require moral, legal and financial responsibility from responsible bodies for any undesirable environmental or other outcomes. Steps should also be taken to ensure that ANZFA decisions respect cultural diversity and the rights of indigenous people in New Zealand and Australia.
However, it is the opinion of the ICGE that not enough consideration is given to ethical and spiritual matters in the ERMA review process. It was acknowledged that ERMA alone is unlikely to be able to review all such issues and the establishment of an independent Ethics Council was therefore suggested. Regarding the importation of GM products such as food, pharmaceuticals, and in the future nutriceuticals, it is the ICGE’s submission that there is the same need to consider ethical issues of informed consent, autonomy and choice, and justice and equity with regard to access. This strategy requires adequate labelling of products. Future strategies should also include information that will enable consumers of GM products to make an informed decision.
In respect to commercial release, it is the ICGE’s submission that a post-release monitoring system should be set up now, before the position arises. Regulations in respect to safeguards of the environment and consumers, and liability clauses regarding harm to the environment or to consumers also need to be established.
Intellectual property The ICGE submitted that it had no objection to the patenting of a specific application using genetic information but they were are opposed to the patenting of a gene sequence as such, independent of the specific application. They further affirmed turning down patents for human genetic material, on spiritual grounds. They were particularly concerned about the exploitation of Maori, or any other group, within New Zealand. In their opinion, any patents or business arrangements taken out as a result of research within New Zealand should be such as to share the benefits of research both financially and in other ways with those involved in the research and those who are the subject of the research, with economic benefits allocated in a just and equitable manner. Particular care should be accorded to privacy and confidentiality issues and, as appropriate, to cultural attitude regarding ownership of information. In respect to indigenous flora and fauna, the ICGE submitted that the genetic resources of New Zealand belong to all New Zealanders under the Treaty. Any granting of access to those resources must be done in accordance with Treaty obligations.
RISKS & BENEFITSSubmission The ICGE observed that there is a risk of New Zealand losing the creativity of many talented scientists, should GM activities be restricted or the regulatory controls over GM technology be intensified. They acknowledged that there is already frustration over the amount of regulation of scientific activity. It was seen as undesirable to lose the knowledge base and to remove the incentive for New Zealanders to develop a career in biological science. In their opinion, there is a need for research to be carried out in New Zealand in order to address the many issues, which are of particular significance to New Zealand for example, possum control. It GM technology is avoided there could be major risks for those who are dependent on GM pharmaceuticals, particularly as in some cases the conventional product is not readily available, or may be unsafe because of contamination from its source.
CULTURAL, ETHICAL & SOCIAL ISSUESSubmission Treaty of Waitangi The ICGE submitted that the role of the Crown in achieving a spiritual understanding of the processes and the ground upon which the practice and exploitation of GM technology is built is unusual in an avowedly secular society. The Treaty partnership, however, does not make this distinction. In the opinion of the ICGE the principle of partnership encompasses the totality of life with all its taonga. They then noted that the unwritten, but reported, Article IV in the Treaty of Waitangi enshrines freedom of belief in all its diversity as a recognised part of the life and being of all New Zealanders.
Public perception The ICGE believed that there is a need to have more information available to the public. This is common to all areas of GM applications, both food and pharmaceuticals. The ICGE noted that there is considerable concern for short and long term safety in both these areas and a sense of danger from unforeseen outcomes. They also emphasized the need for cultural awareness so that no one is put in the position of having to receive medical treatment, which is unacceptable for cultural reasons.
However, it was noted that there are deep-seated and fundamental ethical concerns to be addressed with the general public, and it cannot be assumed that all New Zealanders would accept GM ‘ if only they understood it better.’ For example, Maori opposition to transferring human genetic information into cattle embryos was not considered sufficiently important to prevent the trial from proceeding. The overall benefits for the whole community were considered to over-rule Maori concerns. They highlighted that such concerns would not be alleviated by the provision of more scientific data or concepts. Maori are not reassured, for example, by the scientific information that it is synthetic copies of human DNA that are used, rather than actual human DNA extracted from human tissue.
Ethics It was noted that like most sophisticated technologies, GM technology promises both potential blessings and curses, both power for good and power for evil. In the opinion of the ICGE the key word is power, for GM technology is in large measure a question of the ethics of using and abusing power. The ICGE then submitted that the ethical review of genetic research and practice has to scrutinise both its methodology and its impact generally in relation to fundamental moral considerations. We need to look at not only the realisability of worthwhile objectives, but also the impact of genetics on the values that inform human relationships like autonomy, kindness, not causing harm, dignity, truthfulness and justice. In this respect, there is a need for informed consent, equity, and the benefits of the technology must outweigh the risks.
It was further submitted that in advising on gene therapy, it would be necessary for GTAC to respect the difference seen between somatic gene therapy and inherited gene therapy. In the experience of the ICGE there are concerns ethically and spiritually about changing a person’s DNA, whether the change is inherited or not, but the concerns are greater if the change is inherited. On the other hand, it was acknowledged that it may be a ‘good thing’ to correct a faulty gene and therefore treat a person’s illness. A question was raised as to whether GTAC has input from Maori and from laypersons in the general public to facilitate discussion of ethical and cultural issues.
Spiritual concerns The ICGE observed the public had the following spiritual interests and concerns:
ECONOMIC ISSUESSubmission The ICGE submitted that there is a risk of New Zealand losing its natural "clean and green" image, should GM food crops become established in New Zealand. They noted that there is concern that this could prevent New Zealand filling a lucrative niche market internationally, and prevent potential economic benefits from being realised. It was noted that organic growers in New Zealand are at risk of their crops being contaminated by GM crops and are directly disadvantaged by any move away from New Zealand agriculture being perceived to be GM free. Furthermore, the New Zealand economy is closely linked with the ecology of our land. There are, therefore, economic risks inherent in the release of any inadequately tested GMOs into the wider environment. The risk of genes from New Zealand’s indigenous fauna and flora being patented by offshore companies was also noted.
|