Kedgley Sue: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Kedgley Sue: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:620;Page:15740] 
3.  
SUE KEDGLEY (Green) 
 to the  
Minister for Food Safety 
: Did Monsanto sign a statutory declaration as part of its application to Food Standards Australia New Zealand for approval of GM corn MON 863 declaring that it had not withheld any information that might prejudice its application; if not why not? 
Hon JIM SUTTON (Minister of Agriculture) 
 on behalf of the 
 Minister for Food Safety 
: I am advised that Monsanto both provided and honoured the terms of the statutory declaration. 
Sue Kedgley 
: In its application to Food Standards Australia New Zealand did Monsanto withhold a study that suggested that genetically modified corn MON 863 had caused abnormalities in rats? 
Hon JIM SUTTON 
: The study to which the member refers was a 90-day feeding study considering nutritional aspects. It was not a toxicity study and therefore was not a food safety concern. 
Sue Kedgley 
: Does the Minister agree that a study showing that a genetically engineered corn had caused abnormalities in rats is exactly the sort of prejudicial evidence that signing the Food Standards Australia New Zealand statutory declaration makes it illegal to withhold? 
Hon JIM SUTTON 
: As I have previously advised the House when the study to which the member refers was published the whole matter was examined by the country of jurisdiction—France. The French food safety authority found that the corn was perfectly safe to consume. 
Sue Kedgley 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The Minister did not answer my question. My question was whether that was the sort of study that it would be prejudicial to withhold given that it was information that might prejudice Monsanto’s application. The Minister did not answer the question. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: If the Minister wishes to comment he can. 
Hon JIM SUTTON 
: In my reply to the first supplementary question I pointed out that the study to which the member refers was a nutritional study and was nothing to do with food safety. 
Sue Kedgley 
: Is the Minister saying that the Government considers it acceptable for a corporation to withhold a study that showed abnormalities in rats when seeking approval for that food for human consumption? 
Hon JIM SUTTON 
: The study was obviously not conducted by Monsanto and it has been discredited by the proper food safety authority of the country in which it was conducted. 
Sue Kedgley 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I asked the Minister whether he thought it was acceptable for Monsanto to withhold a nutritional feeding study as part of an application for approval into the food supply. The Minister has not answered my question. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I think the Minister did address that question. 
Sue Kedgley 
: Has Food Standards Australia New Zealand received the original study and the original data from Monsanto that it sought more than 10 days ago after the Green Party had informed it that the study had been withheld? 
Hon JIM SUTTON 
: I have no advice on that. 
Sue Kedgley 
: How can the Minister say he has had no advice on that when I spoke to the head of our office of Food Safety Australia New Zealand on The Terrace who said it had not received the study; how can it possibly be the case that the Minister did not? And why should New Zealanders have any confidence in the Food Safety Australia New Zealand approval process for genetically modified food if corporations are allowed to make fraudulent statutory declarations and withhold studies that may prejudice their applications and Food Safety Australia New Zealand fails to act on those serious matters of concern? 
Hon JIM SUTTON 
: Obviously in relation to first part of the member’s question she has already obtained a response directly from the department so she has no need for elaboration by me. But I must say in respect of the rest of her question that it is notable that sometimes when people want to ignore the results of a study they find a way. For example I am advised that there are high concentrations of carcinogens in the tar content that comes from cannabis and lots of people still campaign to legalise the stuff. 
Jeanette Fitzsimons 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I fail to see the relevance of that response to the question that was asked. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I am just a little disturbed about these points of order. I will judge whether a question has been addressed. That reply certainly did address that question. 
Sue Kedgley 
: Will Food Safety Australia New Zealand be seeking a formal review of MON 863 now that it has come to light that Monsanto withheld a study showing abnormalities in rats; in the light of that new information will it be undertaking a formal review of that application? 
Hon JIM SUTTON 
: It certainly is the practice of Food Safety Australia New Zealand to review its decisions and its data when credible new data are received. In this case however I am bound to point out that I am advised that so far not a single case has been discovered of anyone coming to harm from eating food that contained an ingredient derived from a genetically modified organism.