“We want to ensure GMO regulations contribute to better outcomes for New Zealanders through more research, innovation and development, and improved access to biomedical therapies and medicines.”
Parker said the proposed changes would remove barriers to research and help foster biotech companies producing high-value products in New Zealand, while retaining a considered approach to GMOs.
“We recognise some New Zealanders have strong views on GMOs, and we want to take measured steps to update the regulatory settings,” he said.
“That’s why these changes apply only to laboratory settings and for biomedical therapies that use biology and organisms, like cells, to create products that improve human health.
“We’re not changing the rules that relate to field trials and releases of GMOs into the environment, such as plants or animals.”
Parker said the proposed approach followed international best practice.
“These changes will simplify the current system while ensuring appropriate checks and balances remain in place.
“In particular, the current comprehensive approval processes undertaken by Medsafe for medicines and biomedical therapies will remain unchanged.”
Gerrard planned to release an updated briefing on the practical issues surrounding gene-editing later this week.
Responding to today’s announcement, she told the Herald the move was a sensible first step, “and we hope that there’s a follow-up step for wider applications”.
Otago University geneticist Professor Peter Dearden said any steps to improve the regulatory process was good news.
“But the thing that disappoints me is that, if you stick a wedge between medical and other uses of genetic modification, you have a problem where you’re saying, it’s alright to have genetically-modified humans, but we can’t eat or make genetically-modified foods, or even give genetically-modified grass to cows.
“I don’t see the rationale for that.”
The move comes soon after National’s Judith Collins announced a new plan that would create a dedicated regulator for the technology and streamline approvals for trials and use of non-GE or GM biotechnologies.
Collins, the party’s science, innovation, and technology spokeswoman, said the rules would bring New Zealand into line with jurisdictions like Australia and many European countries.
Also eager for reform is Act, whose spokeswoman (and formerly National’s) Dr Parmjeet Parmar said a law change was “desperately needed to ensure we can make scientific advancements while having a clearly regulated framework that mitigates risk”.
Over the past two decades, our regulations around GM have generally kept to a “proceed-with-caution” approach set by the Royal Commission.
They’re controlled under the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (HSNO) Act, which has aged around a time-stamped list of genetic tools, leaving legal and scientific definitions increasingly misaligned.
In the time the HSNO Act has governed GM, we’ve seen the advent of gene editing tools like Crispr Cas-9 – whereby organisms can be tweaked without needing to introduce material from others and often described by scientists as an entirely different technology.
Many scientists have argued the rules have been overly restrictive - it’s been more than a decade since our Environmental Protection Authority last received an application for GMO field tests – while the biotech sector has sounded worries of New Zealand being left behind.
To date, the only GMOs approved for release into the environment in New Zealand have been biomedical applications, with little Government appetite to use the tech to combat pest predators or allow farmers to grow gene-edited high metabolisable energy (HME) ryegrass.
