The bombshell interview and its fallout hit Labour in the polls, poisoned its relationship with the Greens, and possibly cost it a parliamentary majority. Although Clark formed a Government after the election, she needed support from Jim Anderton’s Progressives and Peter Dunne’s United Future.
Make it your business to know
Start your day with the latest business headlines straight to your inbox.Corngate echoed down the years. For more than two decades it coloured politicians’ appetite to move beyond an ultra-cautious approach to GM regulation. Afraid of a repeat of 2002, politicians steered clear of the issue.
Until now. In December, the Government introduced the Gene Technology Bill, which will reform the regulation of GM.
It is long overdue. The current regulatory framework for GM is no longer fit for purpose. It is so restrictive that New Zealand scientists often conduct their research overseas rather than navigate the byzantine domestic approval processes. The costs of compliance frequently exceed the costs of the experiments themselves.
Take AgResearch’s promising high metabolisable energy ryegrass, which could help reduce greenhouse gas emissions from livestock. It had to undergo field trials overseas because dealing with New Zealand’s regulatory system was too onerous.
These are not just inconveniences. They represent lost opportunities which have only grown over the years as science has developed. Many countries, including Australia, Canada, England, the EU, and Japan, have changed their GM regulations or are proposing to do so. New Zealand is increasingly an outlier in maintaining regulations designed for a different era.
New Zealand’s productivity growth has stalled. There is a strong need for new tools to give it a kick-start. GM offers opportunities across multiple sectors, but New Zealand can only seize these opportunities with a regulatory system that enables innovation.
As Prime Minister Christopher Luxon recently emphasised in his State of the Nation speech, New Zealand needs to shift from a culture of “no” to one of “yes”, embracing growth and innovation. New Zealand’s brightest minds must develop solutions to challenges such as climate change and agricultural productivity without being forced to take their ideas offshore.
The Gene Technology Bill offers a chance to break free from regulatory aspic. Inspired by Australian legislation, it will replace a one-size-fits-all approach to GM with a system that matches regulatory oversight to risk.
Medical researchers would be able to develop new treatments more efficiently. Agricultural scientists could work on crops that reduce greenhouse gas emissions, increase productivity, and resist drought and disease. Conservation efforts would benefit from innovative pest control solutions, such as genetic sterilisation and reducing the use of pesticides and poisons. This would happen under oversight focused on managing risks rather than bureaucratic compliance.
Public opinion globally and in New Zealand seems to have become more accepting of GM, although there are still plenty of critics.
Some have raised concerns about a potential impact on our agricultural exports and “clean, green” image. These can be managed. Australia, with its more enabling legislation, has not lost market access. It maintains a thriving organic sector and significant GM research and development. Meanwhile, New Zealand exporters, including Fonterra, will continue to be sensitive to consumers’ needs and preferences offshore.
Others, including organic producers, have concerns about the cross-pollination of GM plants with non-GM plants. There are strategies to deal with this risk. They include buffer zones; adjusting planting dates to avoid overlapping flowering periods; GM plant sterility or seedless varieties (biological containment); and other co-existence measures such as crop rotation, dedicated machinery for GM and non-GM plants, and clear labelling.
Others worry about insufficient public consultation or perceived weak safeguards for safety, the environment and cultural matters. However, the bill provides risk-based oversight through an independent regulator within the Environmental Protection Authority, supported by technical and Māori advisory committees.
Parliament’s Health Select Committee is now considering the Gene Technology Bill and has called for submissions. As with all bills, there will be areas in which it can be improved. Hopefully, rational discussion will lead to regulation that enables research and development, generates new jobs in knowledge-intensive industries, and provides solutions to some of New Zealand’s many challenges.
As the Prime Minister has emphasised, going for productivity growth is no longer optional – it is essential for future prosperity.
It is time to finally lay to rest the ghosts of Corngate.
