Fitzsimons Jeanette: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Fitzsimons Jeanette: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:612;Page:9089] 
7.  
JEANETTE FITZSIMONS (Co-Leader—Green) 
 to the  
Minister for the Environment 
: When she said on television that genetic engineering “will pay for health. It will pay for education.” how much does she expect genetic engineering to contribute to the health and education budgets in which years and on what evidence does she base her predictions? 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS (Minister for the Environment) 
: 
 Taking the full quote in its context it is clear I was referring to the need for a growing economy to pay for health and education and biotechnology has a part to play in a growing New Zealand economy. 
Jeanette Fitzsimons 
: When she said in the next sentence: “It will pay for the things we belong to.” which things that we belong to did she mean will be paid for by GE: was it the World Trade Organization was it the free-trade agreement with the United States or is there some other thing we belong to that the New Zealand people do not know about? 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS 
: I reiterate I was referring to the need to have a growing economy. I would like to draw that member’s attention to a speech given by the managing director of Wrightson over the weekend who said that millions of dollars would be lost to New Zealand agricultural research if the moratorium continues. 
Dr Paul Hutchison 
: Given that AgResearch had to pay over half a million dollars on two occasions for GE research applications aimed at cures for serious diseases why has her Government given way yet again to irrational Green pressure and made compliance costs much more onerous for medium and high-risk GE medical research into containment? 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS 
: The changes proposed in the New Organisms and Other Matters Bill which I hope we pass this afternoon are designed to allow us to move forward with the need to protect the environment and the health and safety of our people. I agreed with the speaker when he stated in this morning’s  
New Zealand Herald 
: “The reality is that commercial release in New Zealand of GM crops in the near future is extremely unlikely. We should follow a cautious evidence-based scientific approach to GM …” and that is what this Government is doing. 
David Parker 
: In view of a recent report from the Government’s Growth and Innovation Advisory Board that identified agriculture and forestry as the two sectors offering the most potential growth and innovation in the New Zealand economy has the Minister seen any information that suggests GM forms part of that potential? 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS 
: Yes I have. Last weekend John Palmer the chairman of Wrightson Ltd a New Zealand company referred to the report and told his company’s annual meeting that the moratorium must expire because “technical innovation has always driven progress in New Zealand farming and it is biotechnology possibly including genetic modification that is a key to realising much of the future potential identified in the report.” 
Jeanette Fitzsimons 
: Has the Minister read the  
Trust and Country Image 
 report from Otago University which states that according to its market research the prospect of GM being used in farm animals that produce meat or milk for food or in pasture plants to feed such animals received an almost universal highly negative reaction in markets; how does she think that will assist an economy that is so reliant on meat and dairy exports? 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS 
: Yes I have. I have read the report from cover to cover and if one takes out just one sentence one will see that the report advocates that we continue on a case by case basis taking into consideration on each case marketing evidence that may be there. 
Jeanette Fitzsimons 
: If the Minister believes there is already good evidence to show that genetic engineering will be so good for the economy why does she think that the chief executive of the Insurance Council of New Zealand said: “It's like Sars or terrorism—you can have a minor risk or you can have a potentially catastrophic risk. At the moment insurers are unable to calculate the risk. What they do know is that a worst-case scenario makes it an unsustainable piece of business.”? 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS 
: The answer is that as with Severe acute respiratory syndrome (Sars) and other things when one cannot totally tell at the beginning the Insurance Council is very reluctant to insure in the early months. Members will notice that with Sars insurance started within 5 weeks.