❓ Mr. Papalia questions the Minister for Agriculture and Food regarding the potential health risks of GM canola in the WA food chain and the government's legal responsibility. The Minister deflects, stating that he is not responsible for tracking grain and highlighting the benefits of GM technology.
AnsweredQoN 516Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
GENETICALLY MODIFIED CANOLA — HEALTH
OUTCOMES
516. Mr P. PAPALIA to the Minister for Agriculture and
Food:
I refer to the minister's
admission in this place on 3 May that he did not know whether genetically
modified canola from the Barnett government's GM trials was sold to
Riverland Oilseeds in Pinjarra or whether meal made with that GM canola was fed
to animals and poultry and then made its way into the WA food chain.
(1) What has the
minister done to satisfy himself that there are no harmful effects for Western
Australian consumers from genetically modified crops being fed to animals and
then entering the WA food chain?
(2) Has the
minister sought legal advice as to whether his decision to allow GM canola to
enter the WA food chain could make the WA government legally responsible if a
link between genetically modified food and negative health outcomes is proven
in the future?
OUTCOMES
516. Mr P. PAPALIA to the Minister for Agriculture and
Food:
I refer to the minister's
admission in this place on 3 May that he did not know whether genetically
modified canola from the Barnett government's GM trials was sold to
Riverland Oilseeds in Pinjarra or whether meal made with that GM canola was fed
to animals and poultry and then made its way into the WA food chain.
(1) What has the
minister done to satisfy himself that there are no harmful effects for Western
Australian consumers from genetically modified crops being fed to animals and
then entering the WA food chain?
(2) Has the
minister sought legal advice as to whether his decision to allow GM canola to
enter the WA food chain could make the WA government legally responsible if a
link between genetically modified food and negative health outcomes is proven
in the future?
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for Warnbro for
the question.
(1)–(2) The
member for Warnbro made the point that, from his perspective, he believes that
I need to have an understanding or a sign-off or an acknowledgment of the
pathway for every single tonne of grain that gets delivered or transported
anywhere in Western Australia. What is happening in the case of GM canola or GM
cotton or all those other grains that are legal to grow and sell in Western
Australia is that the market sells it where it can find a buyer. The member is
intimating that I should somehow be involved in or be informed about the
shifting or transport of any of that grain; I am not. What the producers of
Western Australia are allowed to grow and sell includes GM canola, and they are
legally entitled to do it. The relevant authorisation or regulatory authority
that manages the allowing of the growing of any GM product—or any GM
event for that matter—in Western Australia is the Office of the Gene
Technology Regulator at a federal level; if it is a food crop, it is Food
Standards Australia New Zealand.
I put this point to the member for
Warnbro: the implication of what the member for Warnbro is saying here is that
there is somehow a relationship between —
Mr
M.P. Murray interjected.
The
SPEAKER : Member for Collie–Preston!
Mr
D.T. REDMAN : — GM canola or
GM canola meal, which is what is left over after the oil has been pressed out,
going into feedstock and being fed to animals, and then those animals finish up
on someone's plate. That is exactly what happens in Europe; Europe
purchases considerable amounts of GM soy meal, it goes into their feedstock and
it goes into the animals that people in Europe consume. It is nothing different
from what is happening in other parts of the world.
I put to the member for Warnbro that a note came past my desk
a week or so ago, I think, and it was a point for noting because I think I am
the minister responsible for the Gene Technology Act that sort of shadows the
federal act. That came past my desk to say, ''Please be aware we are
going to be trialling in Western Australia a GM vaccine that could well solve
prostate cancer in men.'' Am I to take it that the member for Warnbro,
or indeed the Leader of the Opposition—who openly in his response to
the budget this year said he supports biotechnology, research in agriculture
and a whole range of research options as one of the platforms the Labor Party
is taking to this next election—is asking this side of the house, the
state government of Western Australia, to say that it does not support a GM
vaccine being trialled in Western Australia that could potentially be a
solution to prostate cancer in men?
Several members interjected.
Mr
D.T. REDMAN : This one is even in an injectable form.
Point of Order
Mr
P. PAPALIA : I asked two very clear questions: what has the minister done to
satisfy himself that there is no harmful effect —
The
SPEAKER : What is your point of order, member?
Mr
P. PAPALIA : My point of order is that the minister is not responding to the
question; he is pursuing his notes he was provided in the hope that no-one will
notice, and you should draw him to answering the question.
The
SPEAKER : I will give you the opportunity, member, to ask a supplementary
question if you want to ask a supplementary.
the question.
(1)–(2) The
member for Warnbro made the point that, from his perspective, he believes that
I need to have an understanding or a sign-off or an acknowledgment of the
pathway for every single tonne of grain that gets delivered or transported
anywhere in Western Australia. What is happening in the case of GM canola or GM
cotton or all those other grains that are legal to grow and sell in Western
Australia is that the market sells it where it can find a buyer. The member is
intimating that I should somehow be involved in or be informed about the
shifting or transport of any of that grain; I am not. What the producers of
Western Australia are allowed to grow and sell includes GM canola, and they are
legally entitled to do it. The relevant authorisation or regulatory authority
that manages the allowing of the growing of any GM product—or any GM
event for that matter—in Western Australia is the Office of the Gene
Technology Regulator at a federal level; if it is a food crop, it is Food
Standards Australia New Zealand.
I put this point to the member for
Warnbro: the implication of what the member for Warnbro is saying here is that
there is somehow a relationship between —
Mr
M.P. Murray interjected.
The
SPEAKER : Member for Collie–Preston!
Mr
D.T. REDMAN : — GM canola or
GM canola meal, which is what is left over after the oil has been pressed out,
going into feedstock and being fed to animals, and then those animals finish up
on someone's plate. That is exactly what happens in Europe; Europe
purchases considerable amounts of GM soy meal, it goes into their feedstock and
it goes into the animals that people in Europe consume. It is nothing different
from what is happening in other parts of the world.
I put to the member for Warnbro that a note came past my desk
a week or so ago, I think, and it was a point for noting because I think I am
the minister responsible for the Gene Technology Act that sort of shadows the
federal act. That came past my desk to say, ''Please be aware we are
going to be trialling in Western Australia a GM vaccine that could well solve
prostate cancer in men.'' Am I to take it that the member for Warnbro,
or indeed the Leader of the Opposition—who openly in his response to
the budget this year said he supports biotechnology, research in agriculture
and a whole range of research options as one of the platforms the Labor Party
is taking to this next election—is asking this side of the house, the
state government of Western Australia, to say that it does not support a GM
vaccine being trialled in Western Australia that could potentially be a
solution to prostate cancer in men?
Several members interjected.
Mr
D.T. REDMAN : This one is even in an injectable form.
Point of Order
Mr
P. PAPALIA : I asked two very clear questions: what has the minister done to
satisfy himself that there is no harmful effect —
The
SPEAKER : What is your point of order, member?
Mr
P. PAPALIA : My point of order is that the minister is not responding to the
question; he is pursuing his notes he was provided in the hope that no-one will
notice, and you should draw him to answering the question.
The
SPEAKER : I will give you the opportunity, member, to ask a supplementary
question if you want to ask a supplementary.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.