Locke Keith: Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (Genetically Modified Organisms Moratorium Reinstatement) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Locke Keith: Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (Genetically Modified Organisms Moratorium Reinstatement) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:624;Page:19297] 
KEITH LOCKE (Green) 
: 
 I rise to support— 
Lindsay Tisch 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I understand that when we are debating members’ bills we follow the format. This speech should be the right of reply for the Green Party. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Clem Simich) 
: Thank you for raising that issue. A number of speeches can take place. There is one speech short; Mr Locke is quite correct. On top of that the member who introduced the bill may reply if he wishes to but I will not bring it to his notice as he has already indicated he is aware of that. 
KEITH LOCKE 
: I appreciate the opportunity to speak on this bill. It is good that there are three Green Party speakers because as other participants in the debate have recognised it is an issue of great importance to the Green Party—and not just for the Green Party as a party with nine seats in a House of 120 seats but for a majority of New Zealanders. All the polls that have been taken show that the majority of our population—70 percent in one recent poll and I have also heard the figure of 67 percent; there are all types of figures but they are generally around 60 or 70 percent—do not want the release of GE organisms in our crops our food chain and our environment. That is the reality. So it is not as if the Greens are fighting against a big tide which is the impression people might get by listening to the debate in Parliament; the Green Party is surfing at the front of the tide of New Zealand’s popular opinion. 
New Zealanders were upset when the moratorium was lifted because we wanted to maintain our GE-free status. New Zealanders are not stupid. The arguments given by Ian Ewen-Street in his introductory 10-minute speech are common-sense arguments such as the argument he used about genetics. When I studied high school genetics and when I spent 2 years at university studying zoology it was quite clear to me that genes had multiple effects. Not only do genes have multiple effects but the effects they have depend on the context of other genes and everyone has a different set of “other genes”. 
As well the context varies according to the particular environment. We all know that genes express themselves differently at different times of the year. That is the secret of the cycle of life. The climate changes and genes express themselves in a certain way so that flowers grow. Autumn comes along and genes express themselves in other ways. So it is an area where there cannot be a one-to-one relationship of genes to outcomes which is what a lot of people who promote genetic engineering say. 
Dr Choudhary said that there is no science that proves negative effects. I think though that there is some science available about rogue GE weeds and crops taking over some of the countryside and pushing aside other crops and that that science makes absolute sense. If crops are being bred to be Roundup or herbicide-resistant or even pesticide-resistant obviously crops are being developed that might get out of hand. If a crop turns into some hybrid with another weed there will obviously be a super-weed development. The super-weed will then be Roundup-resistant. Or if a plant is bred to be resistant to certain insects and then spreads or mutates it could be difficult to use insecticides on it effectively. So that is the problem. 
There is also the intention of some of those companies using genetic engineering to benefit their own interests at the expense of the community’s interest. Recently there has been the whole issue of terminator seeds. Certainly people have said that outside of GE crops some hybrids do not reproduce. That is true. But the GE food manufacturers are producing seeds specifically through genetic engineering as terminator seeds—not to benefit people as a whole but to benefit their own profits. That is what it is about. People now have to buy seeds from such companies every year and they cannot collect seeds for replanting.