Fitzsimons Jeanette: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Fitzsimons Jeanette: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:611;Page:8246] 
8.  
JEANETTE FITZSIMONS (Co-Leader—Green) 
 to the  
Minister for the Environment 
: Is she satisfied with the progress the Environmental Risk Management Authority (ERMA) has made in addressing the recommendations of the review of ERMA; if so why? 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS (Minister for the Environment) 
: 
 Yes I have received both a draft report—I think a second version on the one that was given in confidence to the select committee—and verbal advice from the chair of the authority that action has been either completed or substantially taken on 40 of the review’s 49 recommendations. 
Jeanette Fitzsimons 
: What concrete actions has the authority taken since the release of the review to address the serious criticisms in that review and what practical effect will they have on the authority’s management of the risks of genetic engineering? 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS 
: A number of actions have been taken to strengthen the authority’s governance role in line with the whole chapter of recommendations to do with governance. They include defining the responsibilities of the authority and the board a stronger focus on governance duties and a restructuring of the authority’s standing committees. There has also been a formal self-assessment of the authority’s governance performance a performance review of its chief executive officer and a strict guideline set for the following year. I could go on. A number of very practical recommendations have been taken. 
Moana Mackey 
: What did the review say about the authority’s performance as the independent decision-maker controlling the introduction of new plants and animals including genetically modified organisms? 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS 
: The review team found that the authority contained a good cross section of the necessary skills and experience. Furthermore the staff of the agency that supports the authority are of an extremely high calibre. The review panel’s report stated in paragraph 2.5.1 that it concentrated on what could be improved rather than on what is already sound and effective. 
Hon Brian Donnelly 
: Did the Cabinet policy committee on 9 April 2003 note that economic modelling results suggest that the release of GM organisms closer to the human food chain poses greater risk than releases from medical or pest control purposes; if so what expectations of the Environmental Risk Management Authority has the Government imposed to cater for that reality? 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS 
: The expectations I have expressed in discussions with the chair of the authority are that if there are issues to do with genetically modified organisms coming directly into our food chain as a result of any release conditional or otherwise I would consider that probably a serious enough matter to do a call-in. 
Jeanette Fitzsimons 
: In view of the statements in the review that “there are tensions between staff of the agency and their counterparts in MAF over the efficacy of some controls and the regularity of monitoring imposed” and “it is at this point that the system of risk management for new organisms is most vulnerable” is she happy with the authority’s response to the Education and Science Committee that the operating agreement with the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry is “a cooperative arrangement that already functions very effectively”? 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS 
: In response to the review panel’s report on recommendations 16 and 49 arrangements are in place for regular and ongoing dialogue between the Environmental Risk Management Authority and the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry on new organisms controls on setting out the monitoring that goes with that and on setting out who is responsible in which particular area so that there are none of the miscommunications of the past. 
Jeanette Fitzsimons 
: Is she concerned that the authority’s current methodology for analysing risks costs and benefits analyses only the financial costs and benefits to the applicant and completely ignores economic costs to neighbouring farmers and to New Zealand as a whole? 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS 
: I am quite confident from discussions I have had with the chair of the authority that the economic costs to New Zealand as a whole will be taken into consideration in the methodology that is under review at the moment. 
Jeanette Fitzsimons 
: Does the Minister agree that the authority’s replies to the select committee on the actions it has taken to implement the 49 recommendations show it is in denial that any of the serious problems identified by the committee even exist and that her answers tend to support that denial? 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS 
: The draft the member saw which was a primary draft—and I have seen further work since then—does not seem to me to show that the authority is in denial. It does say that work is in progress and that since the report was written and since the review some of those recommendations have been fully met and undertaken. I have total confidence in the Environmental Risk Management Authority.