❓ A parliamentary question addresses the licence conditions for GM crop field trials, acceptable contamination levels, and the legality of labeling contaminated canola seed as "non-GM" under trade practices legislation.
AnsweredQoN 1458Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
With regard to licence conditions for field trials of genetically modified crops - (1) What are the specific licence conditions stipulated by the Office of the Gene Technology Regulator for containment of field trials prior to release approval and after release approval? (2) Contamination is considered acceptable at one per cent and the Gene Technology Grains Committee protocols rely on this acceptable limit to ensure coexistence. One per cent is for the labelling of food with DNA present and is not applicable to canola oil. What evidence is there that our non-GM markets will accept one per cent? (3) Will it be a breach of the Trade Practices Act to label one per cent contaminated canola seed as “non-GM” when the legal definition of “non-GM” denotes no genetically modified content? Hon KIM CHANCE
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for some notice of this question. I knew that if I waited long enough, I would eventually be asked a question. Like all good things, it eventually comes to those who wait. Hon Norman Moore: We feel the same about answers to questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: Answers are an entirely different question. This is question time, and if the Leader of the Opposition wants answers, I would be pleased to sit down and discuss a change to the standing orders in that regard! (1) The OGTR’s licence conditions for Bayer InVigor hybrid canola field trials stipulate that the GM planting be surrounded by a pollen trap of at least 15 metres in width, and further surrounded by an isolation zone extending 400 metres in all directions. No brassica crops can be planted in the isolation zone and the area must be inspected for the presence of any brassica weeds, which must be removed before flowering. If no pollen trap is planted, the isolation from the nearest canola crop must be one kilometre in all directions. After harvest the GM crop and produce from the pollen trap must be disposed of, usually by burying on site under a metre of soil. The OGTR will no longer audit and monitor compliance with field trial licence conditions for InVigor hybrid canola, having issued a licence for its commercial release. The Genetically Modified Crops Free Areas Bill 2003, currently before the House, provides for exemptions for field trials. Protocols are currently being finalised that will establish a stringent assessment process for field trials and for appropriate conditions to be imposed to manage market risks. I would not make exemptions for field trials if I considered that they posed marketing risks. (2) The only market that has a labelling threshold of less than one per cent GM is the European Union, which set a level of 0.9 per cent in September 2003. The European Union also requires oil from GM canola to be labelled. I am concerned that up to one per cent adventitious GM contamination may jeopardise Western Australia’s prospects in this market. This is one of the reasons the Government is not yet prepared to accept the coexistence of GM and non-GM canola. (3) No. I am advised that, to avoid liability for misleading or deceptive conduct under commonwealth legislation, caution should be exercised to ensure that any voluntary claims are accurate. Claims that a product is non-GM should clearly identify what is meant by this, such as a tolerance of one per cent by weight of novel DNA and/or novel protein. I understand that the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission would consider a no-GM or GM-free claim as absolute - that the product contains no novel DNA and/or novel protein.
(1) What are the specific licence conditions stipulated by the Office of the Gene Technology Regulator for containment of field trials prior to release approval and after release approval? (2) Contamination is considered acceptable at one per cent and the Gene Technology Grains Committee protocols rely on this acceptable limit to ensure coexistence. One per cent is for the labelling of food with DNA present and is not applicable to canola oil. What evidence is there that our non-GM markets will accept one per cent? (3) Will it be a breach of the Trade Practices Act to label one per cent contaminated canola seed as “non-GM” when the legal definition of “non-GM” denotes no genetically modified content? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank the member for some notice of this question. I knew that if I waited long enough, I would eventually be asked a question. Like all good things, it eventually comes to those who wait. Hon Norman Moore: We feel the same about answers to questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: Answers are an entirely different question. This is question time, and if the Leader of the Opposition wants answers, I would be pleased to sit down and discuss a change to the standing orders in that regard! (1) The OGTR’s licence conditions for Bayer InVigor hybrid canola field trials stipulate that the GM planting be surrounded by a pollen trap of at least 15 metres in width, and further surrounded by an isolation zone extending 400 metres in all directions. No brassica crops can be planted in the isolation zone and the area must be inspected for the presence of any brassica weeds, which must be removed before flowering. If no pollen trap is planted, the isolation from the nearest canola crop must be one kilometre in all directions. After harvest the GM crop and produce from the pollen trap must be disposed of, usually by burying on site under a metre of soil. The OGTR will no longer audit and monitor compliance with field trial licence conditions for InVigor hybrid canola, having issued a licence for its commercial release. The Genetically Modified Crops Free Areas Bill 2003, currently before the House, provides for exemptions for field trials. Protocols are currently being finalised that will establish a stringent assessment process for field trials and for appropriate conditions to be imposed to manage market risks. I would not make exemptions for field trials if I considered that they posed marketing risks. (2) The only market that has a labelling threshold of less than one per cent GM is the European Union, which set a level of 0.9 per cent in September 2003. The European Union also requires oil from GM canola to be labelled. I am concerned that up to one per cent adventitious GM contamination may jeopardise Western Australia’s prospects in this market. This is one of the reasons the Government is not yet prepared to accept the coexistence of GM and non-GM canola. (3) No. I am advised that, to avoid liability for misleading or deceptive conduct under commonwealth legislation, caution should be exercised to ensure that any voluntary claims are accurate. Claims that a product is non-GM should clearly identify what is meant by this, such as a tolerance of one per cent by weight of novel DNA and/or novel protein. I understand that the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission would consider a no-GM or GM-free claim as absolute - that the product contains no novel DNA and/or novel protein.
(2) Contamination is considered acceptable at one per cent and the Gene Technology Grains Committee protocols rely on this acceptable limit to ensure coexistence. One per cent is for the labelling of food with DNA present and is not applicable to canola oil. What evidence is there that our non-GM markets will accept one per cent? (3) Will it be a breach of the Trade Practices Act to label one per cent contaminated canola seed as “non-GM” when the legal definition of “non-GM” denotes no genetically modified content? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank the member for some notice of this question. I knew that if I waited long enough, I would eventually be asked a question. Like all good things, it eventually comes to those who wait. Hon Norman Moore: We feel the same about answers to questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: Answers are an entirely different question. This is question time, and if the Leader of the Opposition wants answers, I would be pleased to sit down and discuss a change to the standing orders in that regard! (1) The OGTR’s licence conditions for Bayer InVigor hybrid canola field trials stipulate that the GM planting be surrounded by a pollen trap of at least 15 metres in width, and further surrounded by an isolation zone extending 400 metres in all directions. No brassica crops can be planted in the isolation zone and the area must be inspected for the presence of any brassica weeds, which must be removed before flowering. If no pollen trap is planted, the isolation from the nearest canola crop must be one kilometre in all directions. After harvest the GM crop and produce from the pollen trap must be disposed of, usually by burying on site under a metre of soil. The OGTR will no longer audit and monitor compliance with field trial licence conditions for InVigor hybrid canola, having issued a licence for its commercial release. The Genetically Modified Crops Free Areas Bill 2003, currently before the House, provides for exemptions for field trials. Protocols are currently being finalised that will establish a stringent assessment process for field trials and for appropriate conditions to be imposed to manage market risks. I would not make exemptions for field trials if I considered that they posed marketing risks. (2) The only market that has a labelling threshold of less than one per cent GM is the European Union, which set a level of 0.9 per cent in September 2003. The European Union also requires oil from GM canola to be labelled. I am concerned that up to one per cent adventitious GM contamination may jeopardise Western Australia’s prospects in this market. This is one of the reasons the Government is not yet prepared to accept the coexistence of GM and non-GM canola. (3) No. I am advised that, to avoid liability for misleading or deceptive conduct under commonwealth legislation, caution should be exercised to ensure that any voluntary claims are accurate. Claims that a product is non-GM should clearly identify what is meant by this, such as a tolerance of one per cent by weight of novel DNA and/or novel protein. I understand that the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission would consider a no-GM or GM-free claim as absolute - that the product contains no novel DNA and/or novel protein.
(3) Will it be a breach of the Trade Practices Act to label one per cent contaminated canola seed as “non-GM” when the legal definition of “non-GM” denotes no genetically modified content? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank the member for some notice of this question. I knew that if I waited long enough, I would eventually be asked a question. Like all good things, it eventually comes to those who wait. Hon Norman Moore: We feel the same about answers to questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: Answers are an entirely different question. This is question time, and if the Leader of the Opposition wants answers, I would be pleased to sit down and discuss a change to the standing orders in that regard! (1) The OGTR’s licence conditions for Bayer InVigor hybrid canola field trials stipulate that the GM planting be surrounded by a pollen trap of at least 15 metres in width, and further surrounded by an isolation zone extending 400 metres in all directions. No brassica crops can be planted in the isolation zone and the area must be inspected for the presence of any brassica weeds, which must be removed before flowering. If no pollen trap is planted, the isolation from the nearest canola crop must be one kilometre in all directions. After harvest the GM crop and produce from the pollen trap must be disposed of, usually by burying on site under a metre of soil. The OGTR will no longer audit and monitor compliance with field trial licence conditions for InVigor hybrid canola, having issued a licence for its commercial release. The Genetically Modified Crops Free Areas Bill 2003, currently before the House, provides for exemptions for field trials. Protocols are currently being finalised that will establish a stringent assessment process for field trials and for appropriate conditions to be imposed to manage market risks. I would not make exemptions for field trials if I considered that they posed marketing risks. (2) The only market that has a labelling threshold of less than one per cent GM is the European Union, which set a level of 0.9 per cent in September 2003. The European Union also requires oil from GM canola to be labelled. I am concerned that up to one per cent adventitious GM contamination may jeopardise Western Australia’s prospects in this market. This is one of the reasons the Government is not yet prepared to accept the coexistence of GM and non-GM canola. (3) No. I am advised that, to avoid liability for misleading or deceptive conduct under commonwealth legislation, caution should be exercised to ensure that any voluntary claims are accurate. Claims that a product is non-GM should clearly identify what is meant by this, such as a tolerance of one per cent by weight of novel DNA and/or novel protein. I understand that the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission would consider a no-GM or GM-free claim as absolute - that the product contains no novel DNA and/or novel protein.
Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank the member for some notice of this question. I knew that if I waited long enough, I would eventually be asked a question. Like all good things, it eventually comes to those who wait. Hon Norman Moore: We feel the same about answers to questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: Answers are an entirely different question. This is question time, and if the Leader of the Opposition wants answers, I would be pleased to sit down and discuss a change to the standing orders in that regard! (1) The OGTR’s licence conditions for Bayer InVigor hybrid canola field trials stipulate that the GM planting be surrounded by a pollen trap of at least 15 metres in width, and further surrounded by an isolation zone extending 400 metres in all directions. No brassica crops can be planted in the isolation zone and the area must be inspected for the presence of any brassica weeds, which must be removed before flowering. If no pollen trap is planted, the isolation from the nearest canola crop must be one kilometre in all directions. After harvest the GM crop and produce from the pollen trap must be disposed of, usually by burying on site under a metre of soil. The OGTR will no longer audit and monitor compliance with field trial licence conditions for InVigor hybrid canola, having issued a licence for its commercial release. The Genetically Modified Crops Free Areas Bill 2003, currently before the House, provides for exemptions for field trials. Protocols are currently being finalised that will establish a stringent assessment process for field trials and for appropriate conditions to be imposed to manage market risks. I would not make exemptions for field trials if I considered that they posed marketing risks. (2) The only market that has a labelling threshold of less than one per cent GM is the European Union, which set a level of 0.9 per cent in September 2003. The European Union also requires oil from GM canola to be labelled. I am concerned that up to one per cent adventitious GM contamination may jeopardise Western Australia’s prospects in this market. This is one of the reasons the Government is not yet prepared to accept the coexistence of GM and non-GM canola. (3) No. I am advised that, to avoid liability for misleading or deceptive conduct under commonwealth legislation, caution should be exercised to ensure that any voluntary claims are accurate. Claims that a product is non-GM should clearly identify what is meant by this, such as a tolerance of one per cent by weight of novel DNA and/or novel protein. I understand that the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission would consider a no-GM or GM-free claim as absolute - that the product contains no novel DNA and/or novel protein.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. I knew that if I waited long enough, I would eventually be asked a question. Like all good things, it eventually comes to those who wait. Hon Norman Moore: We feel the same about answers to questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: Answers are an entirely different question. This is question time, and if the Leader of the Opposition wants answers, I would be pleased to sit down and discuss a change to the standing orders in that regard! (1) The OGTR’s licence conditions for Bayer InVigor hybrid canola field trials stipulate that the GM planting be surrounded by a pollen trap of at least 15 metres in width, and further surrounded by an isolation zone extending 400 metres in all directions. No brassica crops can be planted in the isolation zone and the area must be inspected for the presence of any brassica weeds, which must be removed before flowering. If no pollen trap is planted, the isolation from the nearest canola crop must be one kilometre in all directions. After harvest the GM crop and produce from the pollen trap must be disposed of, usually by burying on site under a metre of soil. The OGTR will no longer audit and monitor compliance with field trial licence conditions for InVigor hybrid canola, having issued a licence for its commercial release. The Genetically Modified Crops Free Areas Bill 2003, currently before the House, provides for exemptions for field trials. Protocols are currently being finalised that will establish a stringent assessment process for field trials and for appropriate conditions to be imposed to manage market risks. I would not make exemptions for field trials if I considered that they posed marketing risks. (2) The only market that has a labelling threshold of less than one per cent GM is the European Union, which set a level of 0.9 per cent in September 2003. The European Union also requires oil from GM canola to be labelled. I am concerned that up to one per cent adventitious GM contamination may jeopardise Western Australia’s prospects in this market. This is one of the reasons the Government is not yet prepared to accept the coexistence of GM and non-GM canola. (3) No. I am advised that, to avoid liability for misleading or deceptive conduct under commonwealth legislation, caution should be exercised to ensure that any voluntary claims are accurate. Claims that a product is non-GM should clearly identify what is meant by this, such as a tolerance of one per cent by weight of novel DNA and/or novel protein. I understand that the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission would consider a no-GM or GM-free claim as absolute - that the product contains no novel DNA and/or novel protein.
Hon Norman Moore: We feel the same about answers to questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: Answers are an entirely different question. This is question time, and if the Leader of the Opposition wants answers, I would be pleased to sit down and discuss a change to the standing orders in that regard! (1) The OGTR’s licence conditions for Bayer InVigor hybrid canola field trials stipulate that the GM planting be surrounded by a pollen trap of at least 15 metres in width, and further surrounded by an isolation zone extending 400 metres in all directions. No brassica crops can be planted in the isolation zone and the area must be inspected for the presence of any brassica weeds, which must be removed before flowering. If no pollen trap is planted, the isolation from the nearest canola crop must be one kilometre in all directions. After harvest the GM crop and produce from the pollen trap must be disposed of, usually by burying on site under a metre of soil. The OGTR will no longer audit and monitor compliance with field trial licence conditions for InVigor hybrid canola, having issued a licence for its commercial release. The Genetically Modified Crops Free Areas Bill 2003, currently before the House, provides for exemptions for field trials. Protocols are currently being finalised that will establish a stringent assessment process for field trials and for appropriate conditions to be imposed to manage market risks. I would not make exemptions for field trials if I considered that they posed marketing risks. (2) The only market that has a labelling threshold of less than one per cent GM is the European Union, which set a level of 0.9 per cent in September 2003. The European Union also requires oil from GM canola to be labelled. I am concerned that up to one per cent adventitious GM contamination may jeopardise Western Australia’s prospects in this market. This is one of the reasons the Government is not yet prepared to accept the coexistence of GM and non-GM canola. (3) No. I am advised that, to avoid liability for misleading or deceptive conduct under commonwealth legislation, caution should be exercised to ensure that any voluntary claims are accurate. Claims that a product is non-GM should clearly identify what is meant by this, such as a tolerance of one per cent by weight of novel DNA and/or novel protein. I understand that the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission would consider a no-GM or GM-free claim as absolute - that the product contains no novel DNA and/or novel protein.
Hon KIM CHANCE: Answers are an entirely different question. This is question time, and if the Leader of the Opposition wants answers, I would be pleased to sit down and discuss a change to the standing orders in that regard! (1) The OGTR’s licence conditions for Bayer InVigor hybrid canola field trials stipulate that the GM planting be surrounded by a pollen trap of at least 15 metres in width, and further surrounded by an isolation zone extending 400 metres in all directions. No brassica crops can be planted in the isolation zone and the area must be inspected for the presence of any brassica weeds, which must be removed before flowering. If no pollen trap is planted, the isolation from the nearest canola crop must be one kilometre in all directions. After harvest the GM crop and produce from the pollen trap must be disposed of, usually by burying on site under a metre of soil. The OGTR will no longer audit and monitor compliance with field trial licence conditions for InVigor hybrid canola, having issued a licence for its commercial release. The Genetically Modified Crops Free Areas Bill 2003, currently before the House, provides for exemptions for field trials. Protocols are currently being finalised that will establish a stringent assessment process for field trials and for appropriate conditions to be imposed to manage market risks. I would not make exemptions for field trials if I considered that they posed marketing risks. (2) The only market that has a labelling threshold of less than one per cent GM is the European Union, which set a level of 0.9 per cent in September 2003. The European Union also requires oil from GM canola to be labelled. I am concerned that up to one per cent adventitious GM contamination may jeopardise Western Australia’s prospects in this market. This is one of the reasons the Government is not yet prepared to accept the coexistence of GM and non-GM canola. (3) No. I am advised that, to avoid liability for misleading or deceptive conduct under commonwealth legislation, caution should be exercised to ensure that any voluntary claims are accurate. Claims that a product is non-GM should clearly identify what is meant by this, such as a tolerance of one per cent by weight of novel DNA and/or novel protein. I understand that the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission would consider a no-GM or GM-free claim as absolute - that the product contains no novel DNA and/or novel protein.
(1) The OGTR’s licence conditions for Bayer InVigor hybrid canola field trials stipulate that the GM planting be surrounded by a pollen trap of at least 15 metres in width, and further surrounded by an isolation zone extending 400 metres in all directions. No brassica crops can be planted in the isolation zone and the area must be inspected for the presence of any brassica weeds, which must be removed before flowering. If no pollen trap is planted, the isolation from the nearest canola crop must be one kilometre in all directions. After harvest the GM crop and produce from the pollen trap must be disposed of, usually by burying on site under a metre of soil. The OGTR will no longer audit and monitor compliance with field trial licence conditions for InVigor hybrid canola, having issued a licence for its commercial release. The Genetically Modified Crops Free Areas Bill 2003, currently before the House, provides for exemptions for field trials. Protocols are currently being finalised that will establish a stringent assessment process for field trials and for appropriate conditions to be imposed to manage market risks. I would not make exemptions for field trials if I considered that they posed marketing risks. (2) The only market that has a labelling threshold of less than one per cent GM is the European Union, which set a level of 0.9 per cent in September 2003. The European Union also requires oil from GM canola to be labelled. I am concerned that up to one per cent adventitious GM contamination may jeopardise Western Australia’s prospects in this market. This is one of the reasons the Government is not yet prepared to accept the coexistence of GM and non-GM canola. (3) No. I am advised that, to avoid liability for misleading or deceptive conduct under commonwealth legislation, caution should be exercised to ensure that any voluntary claims are accurate. Claims that a product is non-GM should clearly identify what is meant by this, such as a tolerance of one per cent by weight of novel DNA and/or novel protein. I understand that the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission would consider a no-GM or GM-free claim as absolute - that the product contains no novel DNA and/or novel protein.
(3) No. I am advised that, to avoid liability for misleading or deceptive conduct under commonwealth legislation, caution should be exercised to ensure that any voluntary claims are accurate. Claims that a product is non-GM should clearly identify what is meant by this, such as a tolerance of one per cent by weight of novel DNA and/or novel protein. I understand that the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission would consider a no-GM or GM-free claim as absolute - that the product contains no novel DNA and/or novel protein.
(1) What are the specific licence conditions stipulated by the Office of the Gene Technology Regulator for containment of field trials prior to release approval and after release approval? (2) Contamination is considered acceptable at one per cent and the Gene Technology Grains Committee protocols rely on this acceptable limit to ensure coexistence. One per cent is for the labelling of food with DNA present and is not applicable to canola oil. What evidence is there that our non-GM markets will accept one per cent? (3) Will it be a breach of the Trade Practices Act to label one per cent contaminated canola seed as “non-GM” when the legal definition of “non-GM” denotes no genetically modified content? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank the member for some notice of this question. I knew that if I waited long enough, I would eventually be asked a question. Like all good things, it eventually comes to those who wait. Hon Norman Moore: We feel the same about answers to questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: Answers are an entirely different question. This is question time, and if the Leader of the Opposition wants answers, I would be pleased to sit down and discuss a change to the standing orders in that regard! (1) The OGTR’s licence conditions for Bayer InVigor hybrid canola field trials stipulate that the GM planting be surrounded by a pollen trap of at least 15 metres in width, and further surrounded by an isolation zone extending 400 metres in all directions. No brassica crops can be planted in the isolation zone and the area must be inspected for the presence of any brassica weeds, which must be removed before flowering. If no pollen trap is planted, the isolation from the nearest canola crop must be one kilometre in all directions. After harvest the GM crop and produce from the pollen trap must be disposed of, usually by burying on site under a metre of soil. The OGTR will no longer audit and monitor compliance with field trial licence conditions for InVigor hybrid canola, having issued a licence for its commercial release. The Genetically Modified Crops Free Areas Bill 2003, currently before the House, provides for exemptions for field trials. Protocols are currently being finalised that will establish a stringent assessment process for field trials and for appropriate conditions to be imposed to manage market risks. I would not make exemptions for field trials if I considered that they posed marketing risks. (2) The only market that has a labelling threshold of less than one per cent GM is the European Union, which set a level of 0.9 per cent in September 2003. The European Union also requires oil from GM canola to be labelled. I am concerned that up to one per cent adventitious GM contamination may jeopardise Western Australia’s prospects in this market. This is one of the reasons the Government is not yet prepared to accept the coexistence of GM and non-GM canola. (3) No. I am advised that, to avoid liability for misleading or deceptive conduct under commonwealth legislation, caution should be exercised to ensure that any voluntary claims are accurate. Claims that a product is non-GM should clearly identify what is meant by this, such as a tolerance of one per cent by weight of novel DNA and/or novel protein. I understand that the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission would consider a no-GM or GM-free claim as absolute - that the product contains no novel DNA and/or novel protein.
(2) Contamination is considered acceptable at one per cent and the Gene Technology Grains Committee protocols rely on this acceptable limit to ensure coexistence. One per cent is for the labelling of food with DNA present and is not applicable to canola oil. What evidence is there that our non-GM markets will accept one per cent? (3) Will it be a breach of the Trade Practices Act to label one per cent contaminated canola seed as “non-GM” when the legal definition of “non-GM” denotes no genetically modified content? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank the member for some notice of this question. I knew that if I waited long enough, I would eventually be asked a question. Like all good things, it eventually comes to those who wait. Hon Norman Moore: We feel the same about answers to questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: Answers are an entirely different question. This is question time, and if the Leader of the Opposition wants answers, I would be pleased to sit down and discuss a change to the standing orders in that regard! (1) The OGTR’s licence conditions for Bayer InVigor hybrid canola field trials stipulate that the GM planting be surrounded by a pollen trap of at least 15 metres in width, and further surrounded by an isolation zone extending 400 metres in all directions. No brassica crops can be planted in the isolation zone and the area must be inspected for the presence of any brassica weeds, which must be removed before flowering. If no pollen trap is planted, the isolation from the nearest canola crop must be one kilometre in all directions. After harvest the GM crop and produce from the pollen trap must be disposed of, usually by burying on site under a metre of soil. The OGTR will no longer audit and monitor compliance with field trial licence conditions for InVigor hybrid canola, having issued a licence for its commercial release. The Genetically Modified Crops Free Areas Bill 2003, currently before the House, provides for exemptions for field trials. Protocols are currently being finalised that will establish a stringent assessment process for field trials and for appropriate conditions to be imposed to manage market risks. I would not make exemptions for field trials if I considered that they posed marketing risks. (2) The only market that has a labelling threshold of less than one per cent GM is the European Union, which set a level of 0.9 per cent in September 2003. The European Union also requires oil from GM canola to be labelled. I am concerned that up to one per cent adventitious GM contamination may jeopardise Western Australia’s prospects in this market. This is one of the reasons the Government is not yet prepared to accept the coexistence of GM and non-GM canola. (3) No. I am advised that, to avoid liability for misleading or deceptive conduct under commonwealth legislation, caution should be exercised to ensure that any voluntary claims are accurate. Claims that a product is non-GM should clearly identify what is meant by this, such as a tolerance of one per cent by weight of novel DNA and/or novel protein. I understand that the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission would consider a no-GM or GM-free claim as absolute - that the product contains no novel DNA and/or novel protein.
(3) Will it be a breach of the Trade Practices Act to label one per cent contaminated canola seed as “non-GM” when the legal definition of “non-GM” denotes no genetically modified content? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank the member for some notice of this question. I knew that if I waited long enough, I would eventually be asked a question. Like all good things, it eventually comes to those who wait. Hon Norman Moore: We feel the same about answers to questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: Answers are an entirely different question. This is question time, and if the Leader of the Opposition wants answers, I would be pleased to sit down and discuss a change to the standing orders in that regard! (1) The OGTR’s licence conditions for Bayer InVigor hybrid canola field trials stipulate that the GM planting be surrounded by a pollen trap of at least 15 metres in width, and further surrounded by an isolation zone extending 400 metres in all directions. No brassica crops can be planted in the isolation zone and the area must be inspected for the presence of any brassica weeds, which must be removed before flowering. If no pollen trap is planted, the isolation from the nearest canola crop must be one kilometre in all directions. After harvest the GM crop and produce from the pollen trap must be disposed of, usually by burying on site under a metre of soil. The OGTR will no longer audit and monitor compliance with field trial licence conditions for InVigor hybrid canola, having issued a licence for its commercial release. The Genetically Modified Crops Free Areas Bill 2003, currently before the House, provides for exemptions for field trials. Protocols are currently being finalised that will establish a stringent assessment process for field trials and for appropriate conditions to be imposed to manage market risks. I would not make exemptions for field trials if I considered that they posed marketing risks. (2) The only market that has a labelling threshold of less than one per cent GM is the European Union, which set a level of 0.9 per cent in September 2003. The European Union also requires oil from GM canola to be labelled. I am concerned that up to one per cent adventitious GM contamination may jeopardise Western Australia’s prospects in this market. This is one of the reasons the Government is not yet prepared to accept the coexistence of GM and non-GM canola. (3) No. I am advised that, to avoid liability for misleading or deceptive conduct under commonwealth legislation, caution should be exercised to ensure that any voluntary claims are accurate. Claims that a product is non-GM should clearly identify what is meant by this, such as a tolerance of one per cent by weight of novel DNA and/or novel protein. I understand that the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission would consider a no-GM or GM-free claim as absolute - that the product contains no novel DNA and/or novel protein.
Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank the member for some notice of this question. I knew that if I waited long enough, I would eventually be asked a question. Like all good things, it eventually comes to those who wait. Hon Norman Moore: We feel the same about answers to questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: Answers are an entirely different question. This is question time, and if the Leader of the Opposition wants answers, I would be pleased to sit down and discuss a change to the standing orders in that regard! (1) The OGTR’s licence conditions for Bayer InVigor hybrid canola field trials stipulate that the GM planting be surrounded by a pollen trap of at least 15 metres in width, and further surrounded by an isolation zone extending 400 metres in all directions. No brassica crops can be planted in the isolation zone and the area must be inspected for the presence of any brassica weeds, which must be removed before flowering. If no pollen trap is planted, the isolation from the nearest canola crop must be one kilometre in all directions. After harvest the GM crop and produce from the pollen trap must be disposed of, usually by burying on site under a metre of soil. The OGTR will no longer audit and monitor compliance with field trial licence conditions for InVigor hybrid canola, having issued a licence for its commercial release. The Genetically Modified Crops Free Areas Bill 2003, currently before the House, provides for exemptions for field trials. Protocols are currently being finalised that will establish a stringent assessment process for field trials and for appropriate conditions to be imposed to manage market risks. I would not make exemptions for field trials if I considered that they posed marketing risks. (2) The only market that has a labelling threshold of less than one per cent GM is the European Union, which set a level of 0.9 per cent in September 2003. The European Union also requires oil from GM canola to be labelled. I am concerned that up to one per cent adventitious GM contamination may jeopardise Western Australia’s prospects in this market. This is one of the reasons the Government is not yet prepared to accept the coexistence of GM and non-GM canola. (3) No. I am advised that, to avoid liability for misleading or deceptive conduct under commonwealth legislation, caution should be exercised to ensure that any voluntary claims are accurate. Claims that a product is non-GM should clearly identify what is meant by this, such as a tolerance of one per cent by weight of novel DNA and/or novel protein. I understand that the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission would consider a no-GM or GM-free claim as absolute - that the product contains no novel DNA and/or novel protein.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. I knew that if I waited long enough, I would eventually be asked a question. Like all good things, it eventually comes to those who wait. Hon Norman Moore: We feel the same about answers to questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: Answers are an entirely different question. This is question time, and if the Leader of the Opposition wants answers, I would be pleased to sit down and discuss a change to the standing orders in that regard! (1) The OGTR’s licence conditions for Bayer InVigor hybrid canola field trials stipulate that the GM planting be surrounded by a pollen trap of at least 15 metres in width, and further surrounded by an isolation zone extending 400 metres in all directions. No brassica crops can be planted in the isolation zone and the area must be inspected for the presence of any brassica weeds, which must be removed before flowering. If no pollen trap is planted, the isolation from the nearest canola crop must be one kilometre in all directions. After harvest the GM crop and produce from the pollen trap must be disposed of, usually by burying on site under a metre of soil. The OGTR will no longer audit and monitor compliance with field trial licence conditions for InVigor hybrid canola, having issued a licence for its commercial release. The Genetically Modified Crops Free Areas Bill 2003, currently before the House, provides for exemptions for field trials. Protocols are currently being finalised that will establish a stringent assessment process for field trials and for appropriate conditions to be imposed to manage market risks. I would not make exemptions for field trials if I considered that they posed marketing risks. (2) The only market that has a labelling threshold of less than one per cent GM is the European Union, which set a level of 0.9 per cent in September 2003. The European Union also requires oil from GM canola to be labelled. I am concerned that up to one per cent adventitious GM contamination may jeopardise Western Australia’s prospects in this market. This is one of the reasons the Government is not yet prepared to accept the coexistence of GM and non-GM canola. (3) No. I am advised that, to avoid liability for misleading or deceptive conduct under commonwealth legislation, caution should be exercised to ensure that any voluntary claims are accurate. Claims that a product is non-GM should clearly identify what is meant by this, such as a tolerance of one per cent by weight of novel DNA and/or novel protein. I understand that the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission would consider a no-GM or GM-free claim as absolute - that the product contains no novel DNA and/or novel protein.
Hon Norman Moore: We feel the same about answers to questions. Hon KIM CHANCE: Answers are an entirely different question. This is question time, and if the Leader of the Opposition wants answers, I would be pleased to sit down and discuss a change to the standing orders in that regard! (1) The OGTR’s licence conditions for Bayer InVigor hybrid canola field trials stipulate that the GM planting be surrounded by a pollen trap of at least 15 metres in width, and further surrounded by an isolation zone extending 400 metres in all directions. No brassica crops can be planted in the isolation zone and the area must be inspected for the presence of any brassica weeds, which must be removed before flowering. If no pollen trap is planted, the isolation from the nearest canola crop must be one kilometre in all directions. After harvest the GM crop and produce from the pollen trap must be disposed of, usually by burying on site under a metre of soil. The OGTR will no longer audit and monitor compliance with field trial licence conditions for InVigor hybrid canola, having issued a licence for its commercial release. The Genetically Modified Crops Free Areas Bill 2003, currently before the House, provides for exemptions for field trials. Protocols are currently being finalised that will establish a stringent assessment process for field trials and for appropriate conditions to be imposed to manage market risks. I would not make exemptions for field trials if I considered that they posed marketing risks. (2) The only market that has a labelling threshold of less than one per cent GM is the European Union, which set a level of 0.9 per cent in September 2003. The European Union also requires oil from GM canola to be labelled. I am concerned that up to one per cent adventitious GM contamination may jeopardise Western Australia’s prospects in this market. This is one of the reasons the Government is not yet prepared to accept the coexistence of GM and non-GM canola. (3) No. I am advised that, to avoid liability for misleading or deceptive conduct under commonwealth legislation, caution should be exercised to ensure that any voluntary claims are accurate. Claims that a product is non-GM should clearly identify what is meant by this, such as a tolerance of one per cent by weight of novel DNA and/or novel protein. I understand that the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission would consider a no-GM or GM-free claim as absolute - that the product contains no novel DNA and/or novel protein.
Hon KIM CHANCE: Answers are an entirely different question. This is question time, and if the Leader of the Opposition wants answers, I would be pleased to sit down and discuss a change to the standing orders in that regard! (1) The OGTR’s licence conditions for Bayer InVigor hybrid canola field trials stipulate that the GM planting be surrounded by a pollen trap of at least 15 metres in width, and further surrounded by an isolation zone extending 400 metres in all directions. No brassica crops can be planted in the isolation zone and the area must be inspected for the presence of any brassica weeds, which must be removed before flowering. If no pollen trap is planted, the isolation from the nearest canola crop must be one kilometre in all directions. After harvest the GM crop and produce from the pollen trap must be disposed of, usually by burying on site under a metre of soil. The OGTR will no longer audit and monitor compliance with field trial licence conditions for InVigor hybrid canola, having issued a licence for its commercial release. The Genetically Modified Crops Free Areas Bill 2003, currently before the House, provides for exemptions for field trials. Protocols are currently being finalised that will establish a stringent assessment process for field trials and for appropriate conditions to be imposed to manage market risks. I would not make exemptions for field trials if I considered that they posed marketing risks. (2) The only market that has a labelling threshold of less than one per cent GM is the European Union, which set a level of 0.9 per cent in September 2003. The European Union also requires oil from GM canola to be labelled. I am concerned that up to one per cent adventitious GM contamination may jeopardise Western Australia’s prospects in this market. This is one of the reasons the Government is not yet prepared to accept the coexistence of GM and non-GM canola. (3) No. I am advised that, to avoid liability for misleading or deceptive conduct under commonwealth legislation, caution should be exercised to ensure that any voluntary claims are accurate. Claims that a product is non-GM should clearly identify what is meant by this, such as a tolerance of one per cent by weight of novel DNA and/or novel protein. I understand that the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission would consider a no-GM or GM-free claim as absolute - that the product contains no novel DNA and/or novel protein.
(1) The OGTR’s licence conditions for Bayer InVigor hybrid canola field trials stipulate that the GM planting be surrounded by a pollen trap of at least 15 metres in width, and further surrounded by an isolation zone extending 400 metres in all directions. No brassica crops can be planted in the isolation zone and the area must be inspected for the presence of any brassica weeds, which must be removed before flowering. If no pollen trap is planted, the isolation from the nearest canola crop must be one kilometre in all directions. After harvest the GM crop and produce from the pollen trap must be disposed of, usually by burying on site under a metre of soil. The OGTR will no longer audit and monitor compliance with field trial licence conditions for InVigor hybrid canola, having issued a licence for its commercial release. The Genetically Modified Crops Free Areas Bill 2003, currently before the House, provides for exemptions for field trials. Protocols are currently being finalised that will establish a stringent assessment process for field trials and for appropriate conditions to be imposed to manage market risks. I would not make exemptions for field trials if I considered that they posed marketing risks. (2) The only market that has a labelling threshold of less than one per cent GM is the European Union, which set a level of 0.9 per cent in September 2003. The European Union also requires oil from GM canola to be labelled. I am concerned that up to one per cent adventitious GM contamination may jeopardise Western Australia’s prospects in this market. This is one of the reasons the Government is not yet prepared to accept the coexistence of GM and non-GM canola. (3) No. I am advised that, to avoid liability for misleading or deceptive conduct under commonwealth legislation, caution should be exercised to ensure that any voluntary claims are accurate. Claims that a product is non-GM should clearly identify what is meant by this, such as a tolerance of one per cent by weight of novel DNA and/or novel protein. I understand that the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission would consider a no-GM or GM-free claim as absolute - that the product contains no novel DNA and/or novel protein.
(3) No. I am advised that, to avoid liability for misleading or deceptive conduct under commonwealth legislation, caution should be exercised to ensure that any voluntary claims are accurate. Claims that a product is non-GM should clearly identify what is meant by this, such as a tolerance of one per cent by weight of novel DNA and/or novel protein. I understand that the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission would consider a no-GM or GM-free claim as absolute - that the product contains no novel DNA and/or novel protein.
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.