Nicola Roxon (Gellibrand, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Health) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Gene Technology Amendment Bill 2007. As the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Industry, Tourism and Resources has indicated, the purpose of this bill is to amend the Gene Technology Act 2000, the Commonwealth legislation which regulates genetically modified organisms in Australia. The act is the Commonwealth component of the nationally consistent regulatory scheme for gene technology. Under the Gene Technology Agreement of 2001, all states and territories have committed to maintaining corresponding legislation. The object of the Gene Technology Act is to protect the health and safety of people and the environment by identifying risks posed by or as a result of gene technology, and by managing those risks through regulating certain dealings with genetically modified organisms, or GMOs.

This bill amends the Gene Technology Act for a range of purposes, including the introduction of emergency powers to give the minister the ability to expedite the approval of a dealing with a genetically modified organism in an emergency, the creation of the Gene Technology Ethics and Community Consultative Committee, and amendments to the process for assessing applications for GMO licences. Labor will support the passage of the bill through the parliament. We do understand that there are strong views in the community both for and against gene technology; however, the debate on this bill is not a debate on the merits or otherwise of gene technology. Rather, the amendments to the act proposed by the bill are by and large designed to improve the operation of the act and the system that it regulates and do not change its underlying policy intent or the overall legislative framework. Further, the amendments proposed by the bill also represent the culmination of a long public consultation process and an independent statutory review process. They are also supported by the intergovernmental Gene Technology Ministerial Council. For all these reasons Labor will be supporting the bill.

The bill implements the recommendations from an independent review of the act and the gene technology agreement undertaken by Susan Timbs in 2005-06. The review concluded that the act and the national regulatory scheme had worked well in the five years following their introduction. The review recommended a number of changes aimed at improving the operation of the regulatory scheme. The amendments contained in this bill reflect the ministerial council’s response to that statutory review and have been agreed by the states and territories.

I now turn to the specific amendments proposed by the bill and the new emergency powers that are the most contentious aspect of the bill. The new powers will give the minister power to expedite an approval of a dealing with a genetically modified organism in an emergency in recognition of the fact that situations may arise in which approval of a dealing with a GMO may be required in a limited time. The issue of emergency powers was considered at length in the Senate committee’s report into the bill. Some witnesses before the inquiry, including Gene Ethics and Greenpeace, expressed concern about the proposed new emergency powers and whether they were really necessary. Our Greens Senate colleagues share these groups’ concerns and unsuccessfully moved amendments to this effect in the other place.

While Labor are somewhat cautious about the proposed emergency powers, on balance we agree with the view of the majority of the Senate Community Affairs Committee that there will be sufficient checks and balances in place to ensure that emergency powers are used cautiously. The safeguards on the emergency powers that will be in place include that the minister will be required to have a recommendation from the Chief Medical Officer and/or the Chief Veterinarian before invoking the powers, and the minister will be required to consult with the states and territories before invoking the powers. We also note that the guidelines for the administration of the emergency dealing provisions have been developed through a process of consultation with the states and territories. So, on the strength of these provisions, Labor are satisfied that the minister will not be able to act unilaterally and that the powers will be used with sufficient circumspection. However, Labor’s strong view is that the powers should only be used as an absolute last resort.

The bill also establishes a Gene Technology Ethics and Community Consultative Committee, an amalgamation of two existing committees: the Gene Technologies Ethics Committee and the Gene Technology Community Consultative Committee. The new single committee will provide advice to the Gene Technology Regulator and the Gene Technology Ministerial Council on ethics and community consultations. The combined committee will also provide advice on risk communication and community consultation around intentional release licence applications. During the Senate inquiry into the legislation, most stakeholders commented favourably upon the proposed amalgamation of the ethics committee and the consultative committee into the one body.

The bill also proposes amendments to the process for assessing applications for GMO licences. There are two sets of amendments in this section of the bill. The first set will alter the order of events during the initial licence consultation process so that the regulator would no longer be required to consider whether an application poses a significant risk to the health and safety of people or the environment before developing a risk assessment and risk management plan. This amendment is designed to improve the process by which licences are initially considered and to give the regulator more time to consider whether dealings pose a significant risk.

The second set of amendments will introduce a new category of licence for GMOs to distinguish between licences for a limited and controlled release and licences for intentional release. The object of these amendments is to increase the efficiency of the regulatory system by streamlining the processes for these different types of applications. The issue of the new limited and controlled release licences was the topic of some discussion at the Senate committee’s hearing into the bill. Some stakeholders expressed concern about the proposed new assessment processes as they relate to limited and controlled release. However, the Senate committee supported the passing of the relevant provisions without amendment.

The bill will also make a number of other amendments to the act and the gene technology regulatory scheme, including the streamlining of the process for the initial consideration of licences and the reduction of the regulatory burden for low-risk dealings; clarification of the circumstances in which licence variations can be made and clarification of the circumstances under which the regulator can direct a person to comply with the act; the provisions of power to the regulator to issue a licence to protect the person inadvertently dealing with GMOs so as to enable appropriate disposal of such organisms; and, finally, the making of technical amendments as proposed by the Office of the Gene Technology Regulator.

As I said at the outset, Labor support this bill. While the proposed emergency powers are somewhat contentious, we are satisfied that there will be sufficiently robust safeguards in place to ensure that these powers will not be used unwisely. Although the issue of GMOs is always a contentious one in the community, the vast remainder of the other changes in this bill are focused on improving the systems rather than the broader debate that will no doubt be ongoing in the community. In that context these changes are relatively uncontroversial and Labor are happy to support their passage through the parliament.

See this speech in context