KEY POINTS:
Seeking Resource Management Act (RMA) approval for biosecurity eradication programmes would be unworkable, Biosecurity Minister Jim Anderton says.
Ombudsman Mel Smith recommended putting aerial spray programmes before the Environment Court for approval in his report into campaigns to eradicate the painted apple moth and Asian gypsy moth in West Auckland and Hamilton between 2003 and 2005.
Mr Smith's critical report, released today, found serious errors in the way the $85 million spraying programme was handled.
He said the Government should have:
* disclosed the ingredients in the insecticide spray Foray 48B;
* advised the 220,000 affected people accurately of the health risks involved;
* ensured that the Health Ministry worked more independently to protect human health, rather than working so closely with the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry which was running the programme.
Mr Smith recommended ongoing research into the health effects of the spray, the Health Ministry appointing a senior official in a watchdog role in future campaigns and spray campaigns having to get approval under the Resource Management Act.
But Mr Anderton today openly rejected many of Mr Smith's recommendations and said he would do little different in a future campaign.
He said the idea of requiring future spray campaigns to get a resource consent was unworkable.
"Yeah right. Here we've got a biosecurity incursion. If this gets out and the moths are gone that's it. You've got very little chance of getting them."
"You've got to deal with them now. If there was a foot and mouth outbreak tomorrow, would someone seriously suggest you go through an RMA process?"
He said it would be impossible to publicly release the formula for the insecticide as it was commercially sensitive and the company that made it would not allow it.
He also said Health Ministry and other advisers had ensured the Government had accurate advice on health implications.
"If we had any serious concerns about health we wouldn't have done the spraying."
He said the Government had spent $20 million on a health service for the areas.
But he acknowledged biosecurity officials were wrong to tell the public there were no health risks to the spray - especially when officials had told Cabinet otherwise.
"Any suggestion that there wouldn't be any health problems at all was an overstatement that has to be learnt from."
However the risk, primarily to asthma and allergy sufferers, was minor and epidemiological research had shown that rates of illness in the spray areas were little different to unsprayed sample areas, Mr Anderton said.
The Greens called the report a "damning indictment" and said the Government should apologise to residents.
The original complainant against the campaign, Jane Schaverien, said the report was a vindication, especially findings that such sprays should not be assumed to be safe, their ingredients should be disclosed, that the RMA should not be bypassed.
Ms Schaverien, who now lives in Wellington, was Auckland spokeswoman for Mothers Against Spraying Kids in June 2003, when she complained to the Ombudsman about the mass spraying of West Auckland homes.
- NZPA
