New Zealand at a dangerous turning point
Right
now, Parliament is considering the Gene Technology Bill
(2024) – a bill that would replace the 1996 Hazardous
Substances and New Organisms Act when it comes to genetic
engineering and end nearly 30 years of New Zealand’s
GE-free status. The Government says the bill will “enable
the safe use of gene technology”, citing potential
benefits for health, productivity, and climate resilience.
But more than 15,000 public submissions have been received,
most voicing serious concern over the risks this legislation
poses to our environment, our farmers, and our identity as a
clean, green island nation.1, 2
If passed, the Bill
would allow genetically engineered organisms to be released
into the environment for the first time since the 1990s. [In
the 1990s there were a number of field tests, where GM
plants and animals were grown/farmed outside, but only under
very “strict” conditions]. Once released, these
organisms can reproduce, spread, e.g. via pollen or seed,
contaminating existing non-GE crops and other organisms, and
mutate. They cannot be recalled. What is at stake is not
just the regulation of a range of scientific techniques, but
also the protection of our food supply, biodiversity, and
international reputation.
New Zealand is one of the
few countries in the world that can still market itself as
GE-free and organic, with strong consumer trust and a
natural geographic advantage as an island. This legislation
puts all of that at risk.
Who really
benefits?
Advertisement – scroll to continue reading
The Gene Technology Bill introduces a new
“Gene Technology Regulator” and a risk-tiered approval
system. 3 Supporters include large agritech and biotech
companies – many headquartered overseas – who see New
Zealand as an untapped test bed for genetic
engineering.
According to GE Free NZ, the Bill
“threatens New Zealand’s reputation for clean, safe,
GMO-free food” and could undermine the nation’s organic
and export sectors.4 The group points out that no clear
liability framework exists for contamination events: if a GE
organism drifts onto a non-GE or organic farm, the affected
grower, not the corporation, would bear the cost of testing
and potential loss of certification.5
The pattern is
familiar. In the United States, Monsanto (now Bayer) pushed
genetically engineered “Roundup Ready” crops that were
sold alongside glyphosate herbicide, vastly increasing
chemical use while delivering no real yield benefit.6
Farmers became dependent on patented seeds, consumers lost
transparency, and ecosystems suffered. The Gene Technology
Bill risks putting New Zealand on the same path.
How
New Zealand became GE-free
Public opposition to
genetic engineering dates back to the 1970s, when concerns
about safety and contamination first arose. Following years
of protest, the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms
(HSNO) Act was passed in 1996, creating the Environmental
Risk Management Authority (ERMA) to strictly control all
genetic modification activities.7
In 2000, the Royal
Commission on Genetic Modification recommended New Zealand
should “proceed with caution” and avoid releasing GE
organisms into the environment.8 That same spirit guided a
voluntary moratorium and ongoing containment of GE research
to laboratories.
In 2014, the High Court ruled that
gene editing is a form of genetic modification and must
remain regulated. Since then, regions including Northland,
Hastings, and Auckland have declared themselves officially
GE-free zones, enshrined in their district
plans.9
This careful, principled approach has
protected not just our land but also our brand. Consumers
around the world trust New Zealand produce precisely because
of its GE-free integrity.
Lessons from past
contamination
We have been here before – and we
have learned how costly mistakes can be.
In 2000, the
“Corngate” scandal erupted when genetically modified
corn seeds were suspected of contaminating crops in Gisborne
and Pukekohe. The Corngate episode exposed confusion over
agency responsibilities and raised public concerns about
transparency, with claims of government obfuscation during
the Royal Commission on Genetic Modification.10
Just
two years later, Operation Pacific confirmed that maize
grown from imported seed had tested positive for GE
contamination. The hybrid seed had to be destroyed at a cost
of $500,000, and even then, complete containment could not
be guaranteed.11
Government investigations found
overlapping responsibilities and lack of technical expertise
among agencies. Border testing and monitoring were improved,
yet officials acknowledged that 100% assurance of safety is
impossible.12
If containment failed under the
strictest laws, why would weakening those laws now be
safer?
What scientists are saying
Professor
David Williams, a New Zealander working on gene therapy at
UCLA, has warned that the Bill is “unfair to farmers”
and based on false assumptions about precision and safety.
He points to well-documented “off-target effects” of
CRISPR and other gene-editing tools, including chromosomal
deletions and genomic instability.13
Despite decades
of hype, only three GE crops – corn, soy, and cotton –
dominate world production, showing limited benefit to
farmers or consumers.14 Much of that corn is not even food;
it becomes ethanol for fuel or feed for
feedlots.
Williams also warns that loosening New
Zealand’s laws could wipe out the export premiums farmers
receive for GMO-free livestock and produce. He poses the
question that if gene-edited ryegrass or maize were to be
released how would non-GE farmers protect their land from
contamination?15
The organic sector and consumer
rights
Noel Josephson, Organics Aotearoa New Zealand
Board Member and Cere’s Organics Co-Founder and Director
says, ‘‘We may think we can solve a problem through
genetic technology, but more likely, we are deepening the
damage through this thinking that we can control nature. A
precautionary element must always prevail to protect the
future of the earth for the generations to
come.’’16
New Zealand’s organic sector
contributes hundreds of millions to the economy and depends
on consumer trust. Cross-pollination or seed drift from GE
crops could void organic certification and destroy that
trust overnight.
In the US, even certified organic
producers now pay for additional “Non-GMO Project”
verification labels – an unnecessary cost that GE-free New
Zealand has so far avoided.17
Groups like No Harm to
Food are calling on Kiwis to protect their right to know
what’s in their food, warning that the Bill could weaken
labelling rules for gene-edited products. Their petition and
MP-writing guide help citizens take direct
action.18
Animal welfare, health, and environmental
concerns
The Gene Technology Bill also opens the door
to gene-editing animals and wild species, including proposed
applications for pest control under Predator Free 2050.
Scientists caution that such releases could cause
unpredictable chain reactions in ecosystems. Once altered
genes enter the wild, they cannot be contained or
reversed.19
The risks of gene editing in the wild are
not just theoretical. This month, members of the
International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) voted
against a moratorium on releasing genetically engineered
wild species – instead adopting a policy that normalises the
use of “synthetic biology” in conservation. Critics warn
this is a dangerous precedent that could legitimise genetic
manipulation of wild ecosystems under the guise of
innovation. As Beyond GM reported, the vote was “a turning
point that many see as a betrayal of conservation’s first
principles”, signalling that even some global conservation
institutions are succumbing to biotech lobbying rather than
upholding the precautionary approach nature
requires.20
Gene-edited animals may suffer unintended
mutations, developmental defects or other adverse welfare
outcomes; meanwhile, New Zealand’s current regulatory and
monitoring framework lacks clearly defined mechanisms for
specifically overseeing the welfare consequences of
genome-edited livestock. 21, 22, 23, 24,
25
Environmental advocates, including the group No
More Glyphosate, warn that GE agriculture tends to increase
chemical dependence, not reduce it.26 The promise of
“climate-smart biotech” may simply mean more patented
seeds and more herbicide use.
The island advantage
– and the risk of losing it
New Zealand’s
isolation provides natural biosecurity that few nations can
match. Remaining GE-free gives us a competitive advantage in
organics, biodiversity protection, and
eco-tourism.
Once released, GE organisms cannot be
recalled. Our clean-green image and high-value export
markets depend on upholding that line.
If the Bill
passes, New Zealand could become a testing ground for
multinational biotech interests, surrendering its global
brand for short-term profits. Instead, we could lead the
world in regenerative, organic, and low-input agriculture,
living up to the promise of being truly 100%
pure.
What you can do
The future of New
Zealand’s food and environment will be decided in the
coming months. Here’s how you can help:
- Write
to your MP, Minister, or Party – find templates, links and
other steps to take action on the OANZ website
26 - Join the peaceful protest: Tuesday 4 November
2025 | 11:30 am – 2 pm | Parliament Steps,
Wellington.
Your voice matters. Politicians need
to hear that New Zealanders want to protect our GE-free
legacy.
A call to protect what makes us
unique
This Bill is not a small technical reform. It
represents a fundamental shift in how we treat life itself
– from respecting natural limits to editing genes at
will.
History has shown that deregulation favours
corporate profit, not public good. Once released, GE
organisms cannot be recalled: it is a warning worth
heeding.
Aotearoa’s strength lies in our clean soil,
healthy food, and trusted brand. If we surrender that, we
cannot get it back. The Gene Technology Bill risks
everything that makes us who we are.
Now is the time
to stand up, speak out, and keep New Zealand GE-free – for
our people, our animals, and our
land.
References:
- ‘Kiwi Gene therapy
scientist’s warning over GMO bill’,
https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/ninetonoon/audio/2018979315/kiwi-gene-therapy-scientist-s-warning-over-gmo-bill - ‘All
eyes (and ears) on the gene tech bill,
https://newsroom.co.nz/2025/10/23/all-eyes-and-ears-on-the-gene-technology-bill - ‘Gene
Technology Bill’,
https://www.legislation.govt.nz/bill/government/2024/0110/latest/whole.html - ‘The
Gene Technology Bill Hearing and Update’,
https://www.legislation.govt.nz/bill/government/2024/0110/latest/whole.html - ‘The
spread of GE DNA in the environment’,
https://www.gehonesty.nz/liability - ‘Kiwi Gene
therapy scientist’s warning over GMO bill’,
https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/ninetonoon/audio/2018979315/kiwi-gene-therapy-scientist-s-warning-over-gmo-bill - ‘The
history of GE in New Zealand’,
https://organicnz.org.nz/magazine-articles/the-history-of-ge-in-new-zealand/ - ‘The
history of GE in New Zealand’,
https://organicnz.org.nz/magazine-articles/the-history-of-ge-in-new-zealand/ - ‘The
history of GE in New Zealand’,
https://organicnz.org.nz/magazine-articles/the-history-of-ge-in-new-zealand/ - ‘All
eyes (and ears) on the gene tech bill,
https://newsroom.co.nz/2025/10/23/all-eyes-and-ears-on-the-gene-technology-bill - ‘All
eyes (and ears) on the gene tech bill,
https://newsroom.co.nz/2025/10/23/all-eyes-and-ears-on-the-gene-technology-bill - ‘All
eyes (and ears) on the gene tech bill,
https://newsroom.co.nz/2025/10/23/all-eyes-and-ears-on-the-gene-technology-bill - ‘Kiwi
Gene therapy scientist’s warning over GMO bill’,
https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/ninetonoon/audio/2018979315/kiwi-gene-therapy-scientist-s-warning-over-gmo-bill - ‘Kiwi
Gene therapy scientist’s warning over GMO bill’,
https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/ninetonoon/audio/2018979315/kiwi-gene-therapy-scientist-s-warning-over-gmo-bill - ‘Kiwi
Gene therapy scientist’s warning over GMO bill’,
https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/ninetonoon/audio/2018979315/kiwi-gene-therapy-scientist-s-warning-over-gmo-bill - https://www.oanz.org/new-blog/ge-a-science-that-decries-life-by-noel-josephson
‘Kiwi Gene therapy scientist’s warning over GMO bill’,
https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/ninetonoon/audio/2018979315/kiwi-gene-therapy-scientist-s-warning-over-gmo-bill - https://www.noharmtofood.nz
- ‘All
eyes (and ears) on the gene tech bill,
https://newsroom.co.nz/2025/10/23/all-eyes-and-ears-on-the-gene-technology-bill - ‘IUCN
votes on gene editing in conservation: Biotech lobbyists
‘win’, nature loses’,
https://beyond-gm.org/iucn-votes-on-gene-editing-in-conservation-biotech-lobbyists-win-nature-loses - ‘The
ethics of genome editing in non-human animals: a systematic
review of reasons reported in the academic literature’,
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6452271 - ‘What
are the animal welfare issues with genetic modification of
farm animals?’,
https://kb.rspca.org.au/knowledge-base/what-are-the-animal-welfare-issues-with-genetic-modification-of-farm-animals - ‘The
Protection of Selectively Bred and Gene Edited Farm Animals
under EU Law’,
https://ges.research.ncsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/Cimadori-et-al.-Gene-edited-animals-2025.pdf - ‘Gene
Editing: Legal and Regulatory Implications’,
https://www.royalsociety.org.nz/assets/Uploads/Gene-Editing-Legal-and-regulatory-implications-DIGITAL.pdf - ‘Animal
Welfare Amendment Act (No 2) 2015’,
https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2015/0049/latest/whole.html - https://nomoreglyphosate.nz
- Organic
Aotearoa New Zealand Tool Kit,
https://www.oanz.org/gefree-future-activation-toolkit
Source link