1
00:00:00,450 --> 00:00:09,908
While officials designed the Gene Technology Bill, the gene tech industry had its own standing group. But organic growers, consumers and councils had none.

2
00:00:09,958 --> 00:00:18,358
Here are six damning things from the OIA files. Number six is what MBIE said about New Zealand's own GM field trials.

3
00:00:18,508 --> 00:00:20,542
One: who was in the room.

4
00:00:20,542 --> 00:00:24,639
The Gene Technology Bill began as National's manifesto promise.

5
00:00:24,589 --> 00:00:30,312
Officials then designed it with two standing groups: a Technical Advisory Group, and an Industry Focus Group.

6
00:00:30,312 --> 00:00:32,581
For Māori: five interviews.

7
00:00:32,731 --> 00:00:34,981
Two: the advocate inside.

8
00:00:34,981 --> 00:00:45,176
MBIE said meeting the Life Sciences Network was a chance to engage with industry. Its chair, who also chairs BioTech New Zealand, sat on the Technical Advisory Group.

9
00:00:45,176 --> 00:00:50,794
It suggested the Minister ask about the opportunities for the biotech sector arising from a reform.

10
00:00:50,794 --> 00:00:56,561
MBIE told the Minister its proposals had generally agreed with most of Dr Rolleston's points.

11
00:00:56,711 --> 00:00:58,347
Three: ethics.

12
00:00:58,347 --> 00:01:06,203
The Environment Ministry argued for ethics. GMO decisions, it said, need to go beyond purely scientific and technical assessments.

13
00:01:06,203 --> 00:01:14,052
Ministers excluded ethics anyway. They also agreed: no requirement to assess benefits, and no reference to the precautionary approach.

14
00:01:14,202 --> 00:01:16,353
Four: trade and councils.

15
00:01:16,353 --> 00:01:21,608
On trade risk, MBIE recommended no mechanism requiring the regulator to address it.

16
00:01:21,708 --> 00:01:28,167
At select committee in March 2025, Green MP Steve Abel asked Science Minister Shane Reti about it.

17
00:01:28,267 --> 00:02:06,837
[Steve Abel and Dr Shane Reti] The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade recommended that there should be a trade and market access consideration of legislation. Is that not a very sensible thing to do for a country that is so dependent on overseas exports, where there is clear concern in overseas consumers around genetic engineering? This is a good question. I think if we look at the Australian Gene Technology Act, it doesn't take into account trade considerations. So if we are modelling on that, then they haven't seen it worthy to do that, first point. Secondly— But we're not Australia, are we? No, but we are modelling the bill on their Act.

18
00:02:07,037 --> 00:02:12,266
MBIE also recommended removing councils' ability to restrict GMOs.

19
00:02:12,416 --> 00:02:14,540
Five: built for speed.

20
00:02:14,540 --> 00:02:22,030
To make a December 2025 deadline, MBIE left out an exposure draft, though such drafts are considered best practice.

21
00:02:22,080 --> 00:02:27,803
The Environment Ministry warned that the speed of policy formulation risked unintended consequences.

22
00:02:27,753 --> 00:02:32,331
Its only dedicated biotechnology expert had been seconded to MBIE.

23
00:02:32,481 --> 00:02:34,123
Six: the evidence.

24
00:02:34,173 --> 00:02:40,955
GE-Free New Zealand asked what MBIE considered on the outcomes of New Zealand's GM field tests.

25
00:02:40,955 --> 00:02:44,959
The answer: MBIE did not consider such documents.

26
00:02:45,159 --> 00:02:50,792
Of the 50 countries the OECD assessed, New Zealand ranks last for lobbying transparency.

27
00:02:50,942 --> 00:02:55,861
The gene tech industry had a standing channel into the design. Everyone else had none.