New Zealand’s Gene Technology Bill Faces Further Delays Amid Debate

The legislative process for New Zealand’s Gene Technology Bill has been delayed once more, with Prime Minister Christopher Luxon stating that the government is carefully navigating the complexities of the proposed legislation. Initially set to be reported back by Parliament’s health committee on July 31, 2023, the deadline has now been pushed to October 10, 2023.

While New Zealand First, the coalition partner of Luxon’s National Party, initially supported the bill during its first reading, it has since expressed concerns about the implications of relaxing the country’s long-standing restrictions on gene technology. The proposed changes would mark the end of a 30-year ban on such technologies outside of laboratory environments, aiming to establish a dedicated regulator within the Environmental Protection Authority.

During the initial discussions, NZ First raised questions on where to draw the line regarding genetic engineering. Mark Patterson, an MP from NZ First, affirmed the party’s commitment to scrutinising the select committee report before deciding on further support. He highlighted the need to consider feedback from food exporters and the organic sector, stressing the importance of weighing the potential risks against the rewards associated with gene technology.

“This is very much a risk-reward,” Patterson remarked, urging caution in how New Zealand positions itself in this arena, particularly concerning its competitive food market.

In a more critical stance, Shane Jones, standing in for the science minister, described the bill as a “work in progress.” He emphasised the need for thorough evaluation, stating that the issues at hand are “far too complicated” for superficial treatment.

Questions linger about whether the delays stem from NZ First’s apprehensions, as indicated by New Zealand First leader Winston Peters. When asked about the hold-up, Peters alluded to existing concerns that had been communicated during the committee’s discussions, underscoring the gravity of the situation.

Opposition parties, including Labour, the Greens, and Te Pāti Māori, stand firmly against the bill, which means it requires unanimous support from all three coalition partners to move forward. Labour’s science spokesperson, Reuben Davidson, suggested that internal disagreements within the coalition have stalled progress. He expressed skepticism about the coalition’s ability to reach consensus on the legislation’s core elements.

Davidson voiced concerns that the bill is progressing too rapidly without adequate consideration of trade implications and public opinion. “There are still unanswered questions. The sector is still not comfortable about the lack of clarity and the lack of certainty,” he stated.

Luxon, however, remains confident that NZ First will not withdraw its support. He reiterated that the government’s intention is to ensure that the legislation is drafted properly rather than hastily. “We’re just taking a bit more time through the select committee process to make sure we get that drafted in the right way,” he affirmed.

He further stressed the necessity for New Zealand to modernise its regulations in line with other countries such as Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom, which have already embraced gene technologies.

There is a commitment within the coalition agreement to “liberalise genetic engineering laws while ensuring strong protections for human health and the environment.” However, the path forward remains uncertain as ongoing discussions reflect the complexities and potential ramifications of the proposed changes.

As the government navigates these challenges, the outcome of the Gene Technology Bill remains pivotal, not only for New Zealand’s agricultural sector but also for its standing in the global market. The next steps will likely set the stage for how the country engages with advancing biotechnologies in the future.