13 February 2025
Ref: DOIA-REQ-0006620-Jodie Bruning
Jodie Bruning
Email:
[FYI request #29246 email]
Tēnā koe Jodie
Thank you for your email of 19 November 2024 to the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment
(MBIE) requesting, under the Official Information Act 1982 (the Act), the following information:
OIA REQUEST
[1] Please supply the terms of reference sent to the technical focus group.
[2] Please supply all scientific information, including that which is listed in policy papers, including
references and appendices, sent to the technical focus group. This necessarily includes advice
regarding the FSANZ proposals to change the definition of a GMO and remove process-based risk
assessment.
[3] This question concerns the extent to which the technical focus group can consider uncertainty
and future risks, and the extent to which MBIE have provided them with existing policy
documents.
a. Please supply all meetings/memos/email discussions with the technical focus group with
regards to how scientific uncertainty will be managed and how future risk from the scaling up of
releases into the is scientifically, culturally and politically justifiable.
Please include all meetings/memos/email discussions with the technical focus group referencing
precaution and/or the precautionary principle; and the findings of the Royal Commission and work
by the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment.
b. The technical focus group will presumably be interested in there being sufficient regulatory
powers to surveil and assess the changing risk environment, so as to protect health, the economy
and the environment. Please supply all discussions with the technical focus group concerning
proposed powers for the regulator.
This may include the potential powers to monitor the published scientific literature and surveil the
global environment (for newly identified risks from off-target and unanticipated impacts from
GMO development and release, regulatory changes, court decisions), and monitor and assess
releases into the environment for the long term.
[4] Please supply 'up to date gene regulation' information on how regulations in the top
performing OECD nations and the latest decisions by the European Parliament compare against
Australia and the proposed hybrid regulations, that have been sent to the technical expert group
for assessment.Please find attached the documentation relevant to your request.
MBIE responded to your first and fourth request in our letter to you on 17 December 2024. Our response
to your remaining requests are as fol ows:
[2] Scientific information
We clarified with you that this was a request for academic literature or expert reports provided by MBIE
to TAG members. After searching our records, MBIE has not provided the Technical Advisory Group (TAG)
with any such information. TAG members were expected to have prior knowledge of the relevant
scientific information as they were chosen due to their significant expertise with gene technologies and
related issues.
I note that FSANZ considers food standards independently from the gene technology provisions in the
existing HSNO Act, and this will not change as a result of the Gene Technology Bill. MBIE therefore did not
seek advice from the TAG regarding FSANZ’s work on genetically modified foods.
I am therefore declining this part of your request under section 18(e) of the Act as the information
requested does not exist.
[3a] Scientific uncertainty and the precautionary principle
MBIE discussed the precautionary principle with the TAG at its June 2024 meeting. I have attached
relevant extracts from that meeting’s papers and one email from a TAG member providing additional
feedback. Some information has been withheld under the fol owing section of the Act:
9(2)(a), to protect the privacy of natural persons;
9(2)(ba)(i), to protect information which is subject to an obligation of confidence where the
making available of the information would be likely to prejudice the supply of similar information,
or information from the same source, and it is in the public interest that such information should
continue to be supplied.
MBIE subsequently sought the TAG’s advice on risk management approaches to develop the secondary
legislation required by the Bill, including how uncertainty would be considered in decision making. These
regulations include how the Regulator would determine the risk level of an activity. I have withheld this
information under the following section of the Act as ministers are yet to make decisions on the content
of secondary legislation:
9(2)(f)(iv), to maintain the constitutional conventions for the time being which protect the
confidentiality of advice tendered by Ministers of the Crown and officials.
You may be interested in the scope of the Bill’s regulations, which can be found in subpart 5 (beginning at
clause 155):
https://www.legislation.govt.nz/bill/government/2024/0110/latest/LMS1010100.html?search=sw_096be
8ed81ede29c_regulations_25_se&p=3
I do not consider that the withholding of the above information is outweighed by public interest
considerations in making the information available.
[3b] Surveil ance and powers of the Regulator
I understand this part of your request covers discussions with the TAG on any powers of the Regulator to
surveil and assess risks, including information from third parties and internationally. The policy intention
was to enable the Regulator to require any surveillance it considers necessary to manage risks
appropriately, and therefore MBIE did not need to seek advice from the TAG on these powers. Some of
the relevant clauses in the Bill include:
Clause 15(j) enables the Regulator to impose supervision and monitoring conditions on
authorised activities.
Clause 110(f) requires the Regulator to monitor international practice regarding the regulation of
gene technologies.
Clause 110(d) requires the Regulator to contribute to and cooperate with relevant international
forums.
Clause 110(e) requires the Regulator to facilitate New Zealand’s compliance with its international
obligations under the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Cartagena Protocol
I am therefore declining this part of your request under section 18(e) of the Act as the information
requested does not exist.
If you wish to discuss any aspect of your request or this response, or if you require any further assistance,
please contact
[email address].
You have the right to seek an investigation and review by the Ombudsman of this decision. Information
about how to make a complaint is available at www.ombudsman.parliament.nz or freephone 0800 802
602.
Nāku noa, nā
Tony de Jong
Manager, Biotechnology Policy & Regulation
Technology & Innovation
