Smith Nick: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Smith Nick: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:611;Page:8453] 
12.  
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (NZ National—Nelson) 
 to the  
Minister of Research Science and Technology 
: What additional tests was he referring to on 10 July 2002 with respect to “corngate” when he said: “The reason that the Ministry for the Environment advised the Government that there were some contaminated corn in New Zealand was that at that moment after the Lincoln tests before the Australian tests we thought there was. We rushed to get more testing done and found to our relief that there wasn’t.”? 
Hon PETE HODGSON (Minister of Research Science and Technology) 
: 
 The additional tests were the Australian tests done by GeneScan Australia in Melbourne. There were also tests done by Central-Hanse Analytical Laboratory in the United States and by Crop and Food Research in New Zealand. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Why did the Minister tell the  
New Zealand Herald  
on 11 July 2002 as well as Television New Zealand on 12 July 2002 that “The subsequent test disproved the suggestion of contamination” when the last test results from Australia on 5 December”—just 3 days before the Cabinet decision—from GeneScan concluded “one may draw the conclusion that the samples do contain trace contamination levels of BT11 GM sweetcorn.”? 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: Officials came to advise the Government that they felt there was sufficient evidence to conclude that there was no contamination. I will give the member a little context. The protocol that used to exist stated that a good idea would be to test 1400 seeds. The current protocol used in this country states 3200 seeds should be tested and the number of seeds tested in that episode totalled 49000. 
Dr Ashraf Choudhary 
: Has the Minister seen any reports endorsing the Government’s handling of the allegations about genetically modified corn? 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: Yes I have. I saw the editorial in last week’s  
National Business Review 
 which states that the Prime Minister appears to have acted properly throughout this matter. It also states that Mr Nick Smith has “long been a Green in National drag” and that Bill English should sack him if he wants to pursue the “corngate” conspiracy.  
Jeanette Fitzsimons 
: Given that the samples sent to GeneScan Australia were larger than those at either Crop and Food Research or in the United States that three of them showed preliminary positive results before an equipment breakdown and that GeneScan Australia advised that “our standard operating procedures dictate repeat testing to the point of a definitive result” why did neither he nor any other Minister or Government official show the slightest interest in ever having those tests completed? 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: I repeat that officials got themselves to the point where they felt there was more than enough evidence to advise the Government that the tests for that corn were negative and on that basis the Government proceeded. 
Hon Ken Shirley 
: Does the Minster not find it strange that the three tests undertaken by GeneScan Australia that showed preliminary positive results were not completed to validation; and on reflection does the Minister not want to rethink the statement reported in this primary question? 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: I will say again that officials had this corn tested by Crop and Food Research on more than one occasion by GeneScan Australia by Biogenetic Services in the USA and by the Central-Hanse Analytical Laboratory in the USA. That sample of corn was tested to the ends of what was reasonable. Officials then concluded that they had sufficient evidence to advise the Government that there was no contamination. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: If what the Minister just said is correct why are there no official papers showing that they ever said that there was no contamination; and why did he the Minister for the Environment and the Minister of Agriculture all say there were further tests beyond those mentioned in Nicky Hager’s book yet nobody in the last 11 months can find them? 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: The further tests that we referred to then and now are the further tests taken after an initial test at Crop and Food Research in New Zealand gave a suggested positive. No other test did. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Why did the Minister on Television New Zealand when the interviewer referred to five positive tests interject twice saying: “Not true; absolutely false!” when the chief executive of the Environmental Risk Management Authority said there were positive tests when the chief executive of the Ministry for the Environment said there were positive tests and when all the papers that the Local Government and Environment Committee received—38 of them—refer to positive tests; and why was the Minister telling porkies in the middle of the election campaign? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No. The member will withdraw and apologise for that last statement. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: I withdraw and apologise. Why was he making incorrect statements in the middle of the election campaign? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No that part of the question is taken out. The rest can be answered. 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: The tests—and the member will know this full well because he has been studying them for 4 months now—involve testing two parts of a gene. One needs to get a positive result for both parts to get a positive test. Getting a positive result in one part is not difficult. It is usually caused by an agro-bacterium. In other words any amount of soil contamination will cause that— 
Hon Richard Prebble 
: No incorrect. 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: The member should not say that is incorrect. It is well-known science that an agro-bacterium will give a positive NOS test. I suggest that the member who has a doctorate starts to use his brain to understand whatever part of “negative” he really has not got his head around. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: I seek leave to table a formal report by the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry the Environmental Risk Management Authority and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade dated 18 June 2001 which states that the two constructs are not required for a positive result. In fact for six out of 10 GM corns what the Minister said is not true. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is.