Dialogue: New regime will save money, not add to compliance costs

By PETE HODGSON*

The Government's decisions on genetic modification do not have the dire consequences for compliance costs that Jim Eagles claimed in yesterday's Business Herald.

Many of the changes coming to the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act (HSNO) will make the application process quicker and cheaper.

The main changes that toughen the regime require the Environmental Risk Management Authority (Erma) to impose conditions it has optionally imposed to date, and so do not add to the compliance costs.

Savings will be made in the area that has most frustrated researchers - the approval of low-risk research involving GM organisms, often carried out under highly secure conditions in a laboratory.

The Royal Commission on Genetic Modification heard the concerns of scientists on this issue and made several recommendations to address them. Those recommendations are being adopted.

The changes will build on those in the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Amendment Act, which gave Erma the ability to streamline its processes by updating forms that were previously prescribed in legislation.

The results of a pre-commission review of the low-risk HSNO regulations are also being included in the new regime.

One key improvement under consideration would be the ability for institutional biological safety committees to approve applications to develop low-risk GM organisms on a project rather than organism basis.

This would allow researchers to make applications for groups of organisms of similar types and risks, rather than make separate applications for each one.

Another useful change will be the development of a separate, simplified form for low-risk laboratory developments in containment.

The current single form for all, regardless of risk, means researchers must often provide unnecessary information.

Further amendments to the HSNO Act, following the commission's recommendations, will allow for more efficient importing of low-risk GM organisms.

Rather than going through Erma each time, researchers will be able to apply to the relevant institutional biological safety committee.

Making sure approval is based on risk, rather than whether a GM organism is imported or not, will make it easier for New Zealand researchers to take advantage of advances in international research and collaborate with colleagues overseas.

All approvals for the development of low-risk GM animal cell lines, rather than just the prescribed list, will also be delegated to institutional biological safety committees.

These changes and more will save time and money.

One point I do concede: the opportunities for objection in Erma's process could cause difficulties and delays for applicants if objections arrive by the busload.

But that is a risk with any democratic decision-making process.

The requirements of democracy are often inconvenient for science, business, and Governments. We override them at our peril.

* Pete Hodgson is Minister of Research, Science and Technology.

nzherald.co.nz/ge

Report of the Royal Commission on Genetic Modification

GE lessons from Britain

GE links

GE glossary