Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 07 Hansard (Thursday, 1 July 2004) . . Page.. 3205 ..

The report recommended that the Assembly pass the gene tech bill with a series of amendments. I am tempted to read out all 25 recommendations of that report, because the intervening period has only demonstrated that the concerns we raised then are as pertinent now and so far I have not heard anyone address them in this debate. However, I will limit myself to reminding the Assembly of those recommendations that are key to this debate. Recommendation 3 states:

The Committee recommends that the ACT, for the purposes of marketing itself as a centre for research excellence and for promoting bio-business, assert its right under section 21(b) of the bill to declare itself GE-free. This moratorium should be reviewed five years after the enactment of this bill.

The Committee recommends that this include a moratorium on dealings with transgenic organisms, such as that in place in Tasmania, on:

• all new commercial environmental releases of transgenic crops;

• environmental releases of transgenic animals and transgenic animal feed;

• trials in the open environment of transgenic food crops; and

• trials in the open environment of transgenic non-food crops where no test is available to detect the presence of the transgenic material.

Recommendation 5 states:

The Committee recommends the Government make representations to the Ministerial Council to require the OGTR to consider the economic and social impact of applications before granting licenses.

Recommendation 6 states:

The Committee recommends that the Government make representations to the Ministerial Council to call on the Federal Government to urgently review the makeup of the Gene Technology Grains Committee to ensure that it has more equitable representation of the community, including farmers.

Recommendation 8 states:

The Committee recommends that the Government make representations to the Ministerial Council to ensure that all residents within a reasonable radius of field trial sites be informed in writing of the location and nature of the site and that the sites of field trials within the ACT be listed on the ACT Government website.

Recommendation 19 states:

The Committee recommends that Section 1 Part 4(a) be withdrawn from the Gene Technology Bill and replaced with the definition of the precautionary principle as named in the Environment Protection Act 1997 (ACT), Section 3 (2)(a). This definition should explicitly name the precautionary principle and not include a reference to cost-effectiveness.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .