Fitzsimons Jeanette: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Fitzsimons Jeanette: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:612;Page:9306] 
5.  
JEANETTE FITZSIMONS (Co-Leader—Green) 
 to the  
Minister for the Environment 
: Does she stand by her replies to written questions Nos 9460 9461 10050 and 10051 in September and October 2002 in which she stated that samples of corn seed were collected from Talleys and Seed Production Ltd by MAF and sent to GeneScan Australia for testing that Novartis paid for the tests and owned the results and that Novartis verbally notified ERMA and MAF that the results were negative for genetic modification; if so why? 
Hon PETE HODGSON (Minister of Energy) 
 on behalf of the 
 Minister for the Environment 
: Yes the Minister stands by the advice she was given. 
Jeanette Fitzsimons 
: How does the Minister reconcile those answers with evidence given to the Local Government and Environment Committee by Syngenta previously Novartis that it had decided not to proceed with those samples and said: “We do not have any record of sending samples from Talleys or Seed Production to GeneScan. We have no records. There are no results. This is an issue about which we know nothing more than that.”? 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: I cannot know what is going on in the select committee of course but I can say that there was no time when any person in any company from any country advised any department of this Government that there were any positive tests from that corn at all. 
David Parker 
: Approximately how many seeds were tested in the year 2000 and why were they tested? 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: Tens of thousands of seeds were tested. The reason it was such a large number is that the first test suggested a positive. We now know the reason for that was that the first test was faulty because the known negative control also suggested a positive. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Noting that during the election campaign Minister Pete Hodgson and Minister Jim Sutton both said there were further tests not in Nicky Hager’s book that showed the test was not contaminated and that in the answers to two written questions in September and October specific tests on seed production and Talley’s samples were referred to the Minister said those samples were taken they were tested and they were negative but the select committee has now found out they do not exist how many more cover-ups will we find in this Government’s claims over “corngate”; if not where are the tests? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: There were three questions there. The Minister may comment on two. 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: This particular batch of corn has been tested much more than any subsequent batch of corn that has ever come into New Zealand. Apart from the first test which is now known to be faulty all the tests that have been carried out by any company in any country have proven negative—whether they have been amalgamated or disamalgamated and whether the seeds have been gathered from growers and then put into one sample or gathered from growers and put into more than one sample. No matter how one looks at it the chances of finding a positive test in this instance are lower than finding that dear old D8 in the Manapouri tunnel. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Did the Greens come to the Government and the Minister outraged resolute determined and resolved with their heartfelt and grave concerns before the Supreme Court Bill was passed last week or is this a matter of principle flying out the window again? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That is a very good statement but it is not a matter over which the Minister has control. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I presumed you might make that mistake so I asked whether they came to the Minister with their concerns before the Supreme Court Bill was passed. That is just a matter of timing. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: If that specific question can have either a yes or no answer the Hon Pete Hodgson may answer it. 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: I do not know. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I assume that you will not accept that the Minister has addressed that question. He did not stand and he did not seek the call. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member is perfectly correct. The Minister will now stand and call me. 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: I regret I do not know. 
Hon Ken Shirley 
: How did the Minister give the replies stated in those written questions referred to in the primary question when the evidence now from the company responsible Syngenta is that those examples do not exist and never did exist? 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: Because that was and is the advice to the Minister. 
Larry Baldock 
: Can the Minister advise the House again why she knows that the first test conducted by Crop and Food Research was wrong? 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: Yes. When testing is undertaken a control sample known to be negative is tested alongside the sample under investigation. In the instance of the first test both the sample and the control suggested a positive. Therefore the test itself was faulty. Had it not been faulty we would not have had tens of thousands of seeds tested or “corngate” or a select committee inquiry. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Can the Minister clarify for the House whether we are to believe the Minister for the Environment’s answer—that samples were taken from Talley’s and seed production parts of that batch of corn that they were tested and were negative—or the evidence presented before the select committee by both the Environmental Risk Management Authority and the company that those tests never existed? 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: The former proposition was and is the Minister for the Environment’s advice. 
Jeanette Fitzsimons 
: Does the Minister think it is satisfactory that Dr Hannah of the Environmental Risk Management Authority who drafted the replies to her question still asserts that that advice was received from Novartis but has no file note of his conversation did not ask for copies of the test results and cannot recall the date of the call or precisely who made it and to whom; and why does the Minister still believe that that advice was correct? 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: I cannot speak for Dr Hannah’s memory of 3 years ago or for the memory of the multinational biotechnology company but I notice that the member asking the question prefers to take the advice of the company. That surprises me. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: If the Minister for the Environment maintains that indeed the samples were taken and the tests exist as she told Parliament last September will a commitment be made by the Government to provide the test to this House? 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: The Government has no written record of the tests—as I understand the House was advised by way of answer to the written question that gave rise to this question of the day. 
Jeanette Fitzsimons 
: While the committee is still endeavouring to determine whether the correct advice was received by the multinational corporation or Dr Hannah and has no view on that matter does the Minister think that this vagueness complete lack of written records or even requests for test results in a case of this importance is the sort of attention to detail and accuracy that we can expect from New Zealand’s regulatory authority when it is managing the risks of GE release? 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: I repeat that whether the two tests the member wishes to bring to the House’s attention were carried out were carried out by way of amalgam with another sample were not carried out were carried out but not reported or whatever—no matter which of those many many permutations is the truth of the matter—there is another truth: tens of thousands of seeds were tested by many different agencies in three different countries and reports of those tests were made available to the Government. No such report looked like being positive except for the first one which turns out to be now known as wrong.