Rachel Siewert (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, upon notice, on 2 April 2012:

(1)   Can details be provided of the trials for the evaluation of methyl iodide products used by strawberry runner growers.

(2)   What are the terms of the permits enabling the trials.

(3)   With particular reference to pregnant women or those trying to become pregnant, what steps have been taken to reduce the exposure of the following groups to methyl iodide: (a) strawberry runner growers and their employees; and (b) individuals living, working or otherwise spending time at or near the trial site/s.

Joe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The answer is as follows:

(1)   The trials of methyl iodide products were conducted under a research permit first issued by the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA) on

21 February 2007. Commercial-scale trials have been conducted since 2007 in Victoria and Queensland. There have been two subsequent renewals of the permit from

30 September 2008 to 31 October 2009 and 21 April 2010 to 30 April 2011. Other details of these permits are commercial-in-confidence. There is currently no permit in place to allow further trial use of methyl iodide on strawberries.

(2)   The permit(s) restricted the trial of the evaluation of methyl iodide to use on strawberries for a fixed period as indicated above for use in Queensland and Victoria only.

The research permits and labels of the experimental product contained restrictions on how it may be used. These included: the product was not to be used by persons who may be pregnant, the product was to be applied at a depth below the soil surface and the site covered with a plastic film immediately following application, all approaches to treated areas were to be signposted, a guard was to be stationed at each treatment site to prevent entry of unauthorised persons and the product was not to be applied near buildings inhabited by people or livestock.

In addition, fumigators applying the product were required to wear full protective equipment including a full facial respirator specifically for the active ingredients. Finally, the product was to be applied prior to planting and crops were not permitted to be planted back into treated fields for one month following removal of the plastic sheeting.

(3)   Please refer to the answer to question 2.