Tanczos Nandor: General Debate 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Tanczos Nandor: General Debate 
[Sitting date: 24 October 2007. Volume:643;Page:12655. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
NANDOR TANCZOS (Green) 
: 
 Organic producers and consumers would have been surprised at the hostile comments of the Minister of Agriculture Jim Anderton about organic farming yesterday. When speaking to organic farmers and taking the credit for the Green Party - initiated funding for Organics Aotearoa New Zealand and the organics advisory service he praises the contribution that organics make to improving sustainability and economic diversity. But yesterday the mask came down and revealed the Government’s actual sneering indifference to organic farming with the Minister of Agriculture supporting Michael Cullen’s view that “Organic farming uses a range of unnatural inputs that happen to be 19th century in their technology and that are not necessarily sustainable”. 
 Well Government indifference means that despite our clean green and 100 percent pure marketing image only a quarter of one percent of our agricultural land is in organic production. In Sweden the figure is 19 percent. That the sector is worth $330 million and expanding rapidly is in spite of that indifference. Many of our key agricultural markets such as kiwifruit and apples are demanding organic or near-organic standards especially in relation to spray residues on fruit and those industries see the marketing and environmental benefits of moves towards organic systems even if our Government does not. 
Mr Anderton points out that sediment and nutrient runoff can occur from all hill-country sheep and beef farms organic or conventional but he totally misses the point. The most significant impacts on water quality are from intensive dairy-farming. That is where the environmental advantages of certified organic production methods which are less intensive and which increase humus and therefore the water and nutrient holding capacity of soils will be most clearly seen with regard to water quality. 
Where organic sheep and beef have the greatest advantage in comparison is probably in terms of economics. Returns for conventional sheep and beef farmers have been depressed for some time yet organic lamb has had a 100 percent premium. Demand is outstripping supply for wool as well as for meat and for many other organic products but particularly in the meat markets. If sheep and beef farmers can make a decent living by converting to organic production then that reduces the pressure to convert to dairying and that is why the Green Party is pushing for Landcorp to trial organic conversion of some of its sheep and beef units instead of simply attempting to boost its profitability by increasing its dairy operations. 
David Bennett 
: They’ve tried it. 
NANDOR TANCZOS 
: It has not tried it. It does not have a single unit in organic production. 
Finally in reply to Mr Anderton’s comments on the use of copper in organic apple production to control black spot well unlike its use in conventional production systems the use of copper is tightly controlled under organic certification standards and the industry is moving to phase it out. What is not part of organic production is the use of endosulphin a highly toxic insecticide banned elsewhere; growth hormones and antibiotics in cows pigs and poultry; the legacy of now banned DDT and other tools of chemical warfare; genetically modified animal feed; and tonnes and tonnes of artificial fertiliser that is dependent on fossil fuels. All of these things are widespread in conventional farming systems. 
Well talk about the Minister straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel! Luckily farmers and consumers in this country are not all so gullible.