 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
The Royal Commission on Genetic Modification - submissionsNational Beekeepers Association of NZ Inc (Poverty Bay Branch)STRATEGIC ISSUES & OPTIONSSubmission The National Beekeepers Association of New Zealand Inc (NBA) believes that New Zealand should impose a moratorium on all open-environment research into, and any commercial applications for the use of, genetically modified (GM) organisms in New Zealand. This means that no research can be conducted outside of properly licenced quarantined research facilities that have proven protocols to ensure that GM organisms cannot interface with non-GM organisms other than as intended for the research objectives. The NBA acknowledges that in order to ensure non-contamination, severe restrictions will be placed on researchers, and some potential research projects compromised.
They further submitted that New Zealand should use this moratorium period to explore and develop international market opportunities for NZ products; utilising a "GM-free" status as a unique international competitive advantage. They also recommended the establishment of a permanent GM Commission charged with reviewing the need for the moratorium, against ethical, marketing and scientific criteria. The establishment of a comprehensive labeling system was also recommended.
ECONOMIC ISSUESSubmission It was the contention of the NBA that a moratorium would create a unique and one-off opportunity for New Zealand in international trade. This opportunity will encourage food and beverage producers, manufacturers and marketers to capitalise on the GM-free status of ‘New Zealand’ and ‘New Zealand-made’ products. The opportunity would allow a change in focus from high-volume/low-cost production techniques. Furthermore, it would allow a real differentiation from the commodities produced in competitor countries that are ‘GM contaminated’. They cited the NZ Dairy Board and Heinz - Watties as two industry groups that have proved the value of playing the NZ clean ‘n’ green card.
They then noted that major corporations, such as Kellogs and Coca-Cola, are distancing themselves from GM derived food products. They argued, therefore, that these multinational companies are creating or feeding a growing consumer perception that GM-free is necessary. In their opinion, this consumer perception can be the basis of a major export growth of NZ products: especially for small NZ producer groups and companies that would otherwise not be able to afford the costs of a unique branding strategy for themselves.
The NBA recommended that the Commission ensures the maintenance of a viable and healthy pollination industry. They stated that pollination is essential for both the pastoral and horticultural industries. Any review of a GM organism application, therefore, must take this pollination into account. In support of this submission they stated that MAF has assessed the pollination value as being in excess of NZ$3 billion to the economy. They then stated that the beekeeping industry was concerned that any negative effect from an inappropriate introduction of GM organisms, coming in addition to the present economic threats facing the industry from the varroa outbreak, could have a disastrous effect on the pollination service the industry provides; to the detriment of the NZ economy overall.
Concern was also expressed in respect to the possible effect that the introduction of GMOs into New Zealand would have on the honey industry. They acknowledged that actual human health may not in fact be imperilled by GM ‘contamination’. However, in their opinion the ‘Frankenstein Food’ perception, whether based on fact or fallacy, is a commercial reality. They cited as an example the reaction of the United Kingdom (UK) public to the revelation by Friends of the Earth that honey on supermarket shelves contained pollen from GM crops. Research into the possible health effects of the consumption of GM plants should therefore be a mandatory before the general public is exposed to this risk.
RISKS & BENEFITSSubmission The NBA was concerned over the lack of data from research on the effects of GM plants on beneficial pollinators including not only bees, but bumble bees, moths and our native solitary bees For example the lack of evidence in respect to the effects pollinators ingest pollen, nectar and resins of transgenic plants. They also highlighted the lack of information on whether transgene levels in crop plants affect pollinator longevity and foraging behaviour. As an example, Jane Lorimer, a witness for the NBA, stated that she had found few published measurements of transgenic expression levels in the pollen or nectar of transgenic plants and none for the resins, gums or exudates that bees collect for propolis manufacture.
As in other submissions, it was noted that bees may act as vectors for the spread of GM plants in the environment through their foraging behaviour. Uncertainty in this area was stated to be exacerbated by the practice of migratory beekeeping where hive are moved from one site to another, often hundreds of kilometres away. |