Resignation of ERMA Chief Still Leaves Conflicts of Interest

The resignation of the Chairman of ERMA on the eve of approving Genetically Engineered cows, sheep and goats, still leaves conflicts of interests and will do nothing to restore public confidence in the organisation.

Dr Kieran Elborough resigned from his position as chairman of the committee just days before ERMA made its 20-year approval “to prove the concept” of GE Milk, against the warnings of independent scientists.

Having overseen the hearings on the application, Dr Elborough resigned on 29 March because of “perceived conflicts of interest” with his role as director of the Biopolymer Network, a joint-venture company pursuing commercialisation of Genetic Engineering in agriculture.

But other members of the committee have a history of lobbying in support of the expansion of GE technology in New Zealand, which helps explain ERMA’s decision in the face of widespread public opposition, and against scientific advice that it is not possible to manage the risk of GE animals that have not been identified.

ERMA was set up to operate “arms length” from political interference, but has become a politicised organization no longer operating on the basis of sound science or genuine concern for the public interest.

In justifying its approval ERMA says its decision is “based on government investment in this research over the next five years”. (7.1.3 of the Approval )

ERMA publicly cited the commercial interests of AgResearch as the reason for refusing to delay its decision on the application while 4 similar applications were under appeal having been deemed illegal by the High Court.

Yesterday’s approval by ERMA for 20 years of GE animal development, includes permission for animal waste to be sprayed onto fields, and for animals used unsuccessfully in experiments to leave the fenced site, with no restriction that these would not then enter the food chain.

“ERMA has ignored its own Ethics Framework that demands they replace and reduce the use of animals in such research. Instead they have favoured profiteering, greed and shown willingness to put at risk Brand New Zealand, Fonterra’s reputation, and the environment,” says Jon Carapiet from GE-Free NZ (in food and environment).

“Cruelly exploiting animals including creation of deformities on the basis it may provide for cheaper, more convenient production, is deeply unethical. So too is using public money to subsidise overseas investors.”

As an automatic result of ERMA’s approval, the financial failure of AgResearch’s overseas investors (GTC and Pharming) will leave ratepayers with the costs of clean up and for damage to the environment. ERMA has deliberately ignored lessons to be learned from the collapse of PPL: the Scottish company which had previously started commercial-scale production of ‘therapeutic proteins’ derived from 3000 GE sheep that were subsequently destroyed.

The Prime Minister and Minister for Local Government have failed to respond to the repeated appeals from Local Government to end the subsidy of private speculative commercial ventures by local communities.

Public subsidy of commercial ventures should not be part of ACT or The National Party’s policy.

It is incredible that AgResearch have been given another 20 years to continue to attempt ‘proof of concept’. Such a plan would fail the test of most real-world business models and is only possible through ERMA’s complicity with political interference and falsification of the norms of company liability.

ENDS

© Scoop Media