26 November 2024

“An attempted economic analysis commissioned by Organics Aotearoa New Zealand (OANZ) on the economic cost of changing the regulation controlling genetic technologies lacks any semblance of credibility and proves the credence “rubbish in, rubbish out”, the chair of the Life Sciences Network Dr. William Rolleston said today.                                                           

OANZ commissioned NZIER to undertake an economic analysis of the proposed changes to the regulation of genetic modification (GM) in New Zealand. Using mostly opinion data from consumers they have missed the mark by some tens of billions of dollars. NZIER state in the report that they conducted the research with “limited time and resources”, that their investigation has been limited and that “other research suggests there would be no impact.”

“It seems that OANZ is getting what it paid for. Some rational thinking and a look at the evidence would suggest the report fails the sniff test,” said Dr Rolleston.

“While there is, in some cases, a premium in the market for GM free food the report failed to acknowledge that where consumers see a benefit, GM products sell at a premium. For example, Bangladesh farmers receive a 30% price premium for GM eggplant because they use less spray and the famous Impossible Burger sold for a 30-40% premium in Western markets while touting itself as proudly genetically modified.

“The NZIER report conflates GM country freedom with GM product freedom. They are not the same. Many of the products quoted in the report come from GM countries with more permissive GM regulations than New Zealand is intending. A report commissioned by the South Australia government showed that while GM-free canola sold at a premium, the premium was no more than GM-free canola from New South Wales where GM canola is grown. The Anderson report went on to say that the cost of the GM moratorium to South Australian canola farmers was $33 million.

“The report suggests that New Zealand is receiving a premium for its products but a recent Beef and Lamb report into the Chinese market states that New Zealand’s premium has eroded to nothing and that the “China now views New Zealand lamb and Australian lamb as close substitutes.” Last year was also a record for Australian grain sales to Europe. All this while Australia grow more than 500,000 hectares of GM crop under the very same GM regulations New Zealand is planning to adopt.

“Everywhere where farmers have had the choice, they have rapidly taken up GM technologies seeing them as beneficial for their farms, their families and their businesses. Uptake has been over 90% in many cases. This has not stopped farmers remaining in the GM-free market if they have wanted to. Co-existence is possible in a country which uses GM – a point the OANZ report misses entirely.

“The OANZ report also fails to acknowledge that we already use GM in New Zealand and have it in our environment. Many of our cheeses are made with GM enzymes, we import GM animal feed, GM petunias were sold in New Zealand garden centres between 2014 and 2018 and there have been nine releases of GM approved by the Environmental Authority. It is a myth or a lie to contend that New Zealand is GM-free.

“According to our Prime Minister 42 other countries have, or are, deregulating gene editing. This includes the European Union and those supplying seed to us. It is not possible to distinguish these products through testing, further undermining our fragile claims of GM freedom and an asserted country premium.

“OANZ’s report is designed to scare the horses but it has simply undermined its credibility. In August this year OANZ welcomed the government’s review of the gene technology rules implying it wanted a mature and evidence-based conversation. They will need to provide much more credible evidence to their researchers if they want to meet their own standards,” concluded Dr Rolleston.

© Scoop Media