Government doubts councils' right to control GMOs

1.00pm

The Government has poured cold water on Northland hopes of controlling the release of genetically modified organisms in the region.

Responding to a legal opinion from an environment lawyer, the Government said it would be difficult for councils to show a real risk of adverse effects of GMOs as opposed to a perceived risk or fear.

Royden Somerville QC had said in a legal opinion that councils could regulate GMOs under the Resource Management Act through their district plans.

But the Minister for the Environment, Marian Hobbs, said it would be difficult for councils to identify issues that would not be adequately and most appropriately addressed by the two Government measures set up to deal with GMOs -- the Hazard Substance and New Organisms Act (HSNO) and the Environmental Risk Management Authority.

The Whangarei, Kaipara, Far North and Rodney District Councils had clubbed together $20,000 to get a legal opinion from Mr Somerville on whether they could regulate against allowing GMOs to be released in the region.

Mr Somerville concluded that district councils had jurisdiction to manage GMOs.

There was jurisdiction under the RMA for local authorities to control activities that involved outdoor field-testing or the release of GMOs for research or commercial use, to promote the sustainable management of natural and physical resources.

Councils could also potentially claim compensation from those who used GMOs if environmental problems resulted.

But Ms Hobbs said the Government got its own legal opinion on the subject from the Crown Law Office last year that countered that from the councils.

Ms Hobbs said the Government's opinion meant that councils wanting to control GMOs through the Erma would have to show that they were doing so to "address matters over and above what's provided by the HSNO and Erma".

"That's a very high hurdle. (The Crown law opinion) states that 'although it is possible for local authorities to utilise mechanisms under the RMA to prohibit GMO activity in any area, if the scientific evidence is not soundly based it is likely that, if the rule was challenged, such provisions would not be upheld by the Environment Court'," she said.

"They can declare a GE-free zone, and there's nothing wrong with that, until say Crown Research wanted to put GE pine trees in up there and challenge it (in the Environment Court)."

Ms Hobbs said the district council's legal opinion would be fairly ineffective and would cost ratepayers to uphold.

Councils would have to conduct scientific research to back up GE restrictions and that research would have to be over and above what Erma carried out.

"That could cost ratepayers if the council wants to go through with the process.

"It would cost too much to employ scientists to provide scientific evidence to back up a GE-free status," Ms Hobbs said.

"A council wanting to deal with GMOs should do it on a case-by-case basis, rather than putting in a blanket ban -- that's what Erma does. And if a council wanted to do that they would have to do it to the same high scientific standards as Erma."

- NORTHERN ADVOCATE (WHANGAREI)