3.
section 3.15 |
Analysis of
submissions from
Interested Persons
appendix 2
Outcomes of Consultation: Submissions
from Interested Persons
Section contents
3.
Analysis of submissions from Interested
Persons
28
3.15 Areas of public interest: an introduction
241
Information, acceptability and choice
242
Need for public education on issues
242
The public's right to know
243
The public's right to choose
244
The public's exercise of choice
244
Report Appendix 2 | Royal Commission on Genetic Modification
Section 3: Analysis o f Submissions from Interested Persons
| H1 | p241
Royal Commission on Genetic M odification | Report Appendix 2
3.15 Areas of public interest:
an introduction
The Warrant under item (j) invited submissions on "the main areas of public
interest in genetic modification, genetically modified organisms, and products".
Four main areas were identified in the Warrant:
(i) human health (including biomedical, food safety, and consumer choice):
(ii) environmental matters (including biodiversity, biosecurity issues, and the health of
ecosystems):
(iii) economic matters (including research and innovation, business development,
primary production, and exports):
(iv) cultural and ethical concerns
Approximately half of the Interested Persons (58 submitters) made substantial
comment on this item. A majority of this group (38 submitters) were rated as being
`strongly for' or `tending to be for' genetic modification. Of the remainder, 18
submitters were classified as being `strongly against' or `tending to be against'
genetic modification.
Comment on these public interest issues came mostly from industry associations
or networks (19 submitters) and research organisations (11 submitters), as well as
other advocacy groups (six submitters) and private companies (five submitters).
A majority of Interested Persons commenting on this item (33 submitters) had an
economic or production sector background, six had an environmental focus, five
had a cultural and ethical background and three had a health background. The
remaining 11 submitters came from other backgrounds, such as governance and
intellectual property.
Issues of public interest were a significant focus of many submissions. Throughout
all submissions the number of submitters identified as making substantial comment
on these issues were: economic issues (53 submitters), health issues (41 submitters),
environmental issues (35 submitters), ethical issues (20 submitters), Maori
cultural issues (21 submitters), other cultural issues (four submitters) and spiritual
issues (four submitters).
p242 |
Section 3: Analy sis o f Submissions from Interested P ersons
Report Appendix 2 | Royal Commission on Genetic M odification
Submitters' comment is discussed in the following sections under the headings
detailed in the Warrant:
*
human health
*
environmental matters
*
economic matters
*
cultural and ethical concerns.
However, the Warrant item on areas of public interest also elicited more
conceptual representations on genetic modification, including wide-ranging issues
of understanding, acceptability and choice.
Information, acceptability and choice
Many of the general comments offered on this Warrant item reflected various
strategic issues previously raised (see section "Strategic issues"). Submitters
presented issues of information, acceptability and choice, with specific comment
centring on:
*
the public's need for education on the issues
*
the public's right to know where genetic modification was used
*
the public's right to choose
*
the public's opportunity for exercise of choice.
In brief, most comments:
*
emphasised the need for further public education on genetic modification
*
supported the basic right for consumers to know what products, and what
technology, involved genetic modification
*
supported the public's right to choose whether certain products, or processes,
should be consumed or used
*
supported the public's ability to exercise an informed choice.
Of these, the need for public education and the public's right to know and right to
choose are included here because they span several of the areas of public interest as
well as other aspects of genetic modification. Exercise of choice is discussed here
only briefly: it is covered later in more detail in relation to food safety, consumer
choice and food labelling (see section "Areas of public interest: human health").
Need for public education on issues
Many people took the opportunity under Warrant item (j) to mention the lack of
public understanding of issues and the need for more public education. Overall, 23
Section 3: Analysis o f Submissions from Interested Persons
| H1 | p243
Royal Commission on Genetic M odification | Report Appendix 2
of the total number of Interested Persons noted specific concerns about public
education on genetic modification. They included industry networks and
associations, research organisations and Maori groups. Most of these submitters
favoured use of genetic modification technology: 10 were `strongly for' and five
`tending to be for' genetic modification.
Several submitters cited lack of public understanding of the benefits of genetic
modification as an issue. National Testing Centre [IP44] noted:
... the public in New Zealand and other places are often ignorant of the facts of human
biology and genetics ... Time magazine (7 August 2000) quotes that in a recent poll, 35%
of Europeans agreed with the statement "Ordinary tomatoes do not contain genes, while
genetically modified tomatoes do."
New Zealand Life Sciences Network [IP24] had similar concerns. It commented
that:
Perceptions rather than facts heavily influence opinions about GM products. ... Real public
interest lies in being able to continue to do the research.
Lysosomal Diseases New Zealand [IP99] stressed "fear of the unknown" and the
"absence of good information".
The public's right to know
Comments upholding consumers' right to know what products and what
technology involved genetic modification had wide sectoral support, including
that of biotechnology companies, industry associations and religious groupings.
Typical of views presented were the following comments:
*
"We believe consumers have the right to know what they are purchasing"
(DuPont [IP1]). (DuPont also advocated "informed consumer choice through
meaningful information and product assurances".)
*
"Consumers have a right to know what they are buying when they go to the
supermarket, and farmers have a right to know what they are planting in
their fields" (Nelson GE Free Awareness Group [IP100], quoting from a
press release of October 2000).
Under the general heading of "public education, consultation and choice",
Monsanto [IP6] noted that it supported "the right of the general public to be
consulted on important issues" and that "it is essential that the public is well
informed and that an appropriate organisation is resourced to present issues".
Monsanto maintained that "the individual must have sufficient information for
freedom of choice".
p244 |
Section 3: Analy sis o f Submissions from Interested P ersons
Report Appendix 2 | Royal Commission on Genetic M odification
The public's right to choose
Submitter comment on consumers' right to choose was noted by submitters such
as Grocery Manufacturers Association [IP54] which argued: "It is essential that
appropriate information about the GM status of food is available as consumers
must have the right to choose what food they consume." Similarly, Quaker
Spiritual Ecology Group, Religious Society of Friends [IP50] stated that
"consumers have a right to choose the food they eat".
New Zealand Catholic Bishops' Conference [IP38] commented on safeguarding
the rights of individuals to make choices, stating that mechanisms were available
"to ensure that those who do not wish to eat GM food can avoid doing so, while
not depriving others of their right to choose GM foods if they are considered to
confer an advantage".
Although the issue of choice had wide application, most submitters commented on
this matter in terms of foodstuffs. The opportunity to exercise choice in purchase
of food through adequate product labelling is discussed in "Areas of public
interest: human health".
The public's exercise of choice
Given the right to choose, the public then need to be given the opportunity to
exercise that choice. This requires that adequate information be available for
people to understand the issues (as discussed above) and, in the case of traded
goods, that products be appropriately identified.
Issues of food safety elicited a very high level of response in all representations to
the Commission. In terms of comment on exercise of choice, most offered in
submissions from Interested Persons focused on the purchase of foodstuffs and
adequate product labelling. This is discussed later (see "Areas of public interest:
human health").