❓ Hon Giz Watson questions the Minister for Agriculture and Forestry about potential Commonwealth attempts to override WA's moratorium on genetically modified crops. Hon Kim Chance responds that he has no hard evidence of such attempts and would be disappointed if the Commonwealth undermined state positions.
AnsweredQoN 684Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to the Western Australian moratorium on the growing of genetically modified crops. (1) Is the minister aware of any attempts by the commonwealth government to override the state moratorium? (2) How would the minister view such attempts if they were made by the commonwealth? Hon KIM CHANCE
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for her interesting question. (1) No. I have not been made aware of any such attempt other than anecdotally. To more correctly answer the question, I have no hard evidence of the commonwealth’s intention in that regard other than the fact that my attention has been drawn to an opinion expressed by a person about a letter that I have not seen - I refer to the anecdotal reference. I have no hard evidence that we are making attempts to determine whether such a letter exists that purports to give that view. The Genetically Modified Crops Free Areas Act 2003 and a Genetically Modified Crops Free Areas Order 2004 announced by the Premier in 2004 designate the whole state as an area in which genetically modified crops cannot be cultivated. Most states have similar moratoriums on GM food crops or GM crops. (2) I would be very disappointed if the commonwealth government undermines the position of any of the states or territories. While I say that, commonwealth law in the form of section 21 of the Gene Technology Act 2000 recognises state and territory laws established for the purpose of preserving the identity of GM crops and non-GM crops for market purposes. Were the commonwealth to consider such action, it would be necessary for section 21 of that act to be amended. It is unlikely that the Primary Industries Ministerial Council would support the removal of the state-territory role in the Gene Technology Act.
(1) Is the minister aware of any attempts by the commonwealth government to override the state moratorium? (2) How would the minister view such attempts if they were made by the commonwealth? Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I thank the member for her interesting question. (1) No. I have not been made aware of any such attempt other than anecdotally. To more correctly answer the question, I have no hard evidence of the commonwealth’s intention in that regard other than the fact that my attention has been drawn to an opinion expressed by a person about a letter that I have not seen - I refer to the anecdotal reference. I have no hard evidence that we are making attempts to determine whether such a letter exists that purports to give that view. The Genetically Modified Crops Free Areas Act 2003 and a Genetically Modified Crops Free Areas Order 2004 announced by the Premier in 2004 designate the whole state as an area in which genetically modified crops cannot be cultivated. Most states have similar moratoriums on GM food crops or GM crops. (2) I would be very disappointed if the commonwealth government undermines the position of any of the states or territories. While I say that, commonwealth law in the form of section 21 of the Gene Technology Act 2000 recognises state and territory laws established for the purpose of preserving the identity of GM crops and non-GM crops for market purposes. Were the commonwealth to consider such action, it would be necessary for section 21 of that act to be amended. It is unlikely that the Primary Industries Ministerial Council would support the removal of the state-territory role in the Gene Technology Act.
(2) How would the minister view such attempts if they were made by the commonwealth? Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I thank the member for her interesting question. (1) No. I have not been made aware of any such attempt other than anecdotally. To more correctly answer the question, I have no hard evidence of the commonwealth’s intention in that regard other than the fact that my attention has been drawn to an opinion expressed by a person about a letter that I have not seen - I refer to the anecdotal reference. I have no hard evidence that we are making attempts to determine whether such a letter exists that purports to give that view. The Genetically Modified Crops Free Areas Act 2003 and a Genetically Modified Crops Free Areas Order 2004 announced by the Premier in 2004 designate the whole state as an area in which genetically modified crops cannot be cultivated. Most states have similar moratoriums on GM food crops or GM crops. (2) I would be very disappointed if the commonwealth government undermines the position of any of the states or territories. While I say that, commonwealth law in the form of section 21 of the Gene Technology Act 2000 recognises state and territory laws established for the purpose of preserving the identity of GM crops and non-GM crops for market purposes. Were the commonwealth to consider such action, it would be necessary for section 21 of that act to be amended. It is unlikely that the Primary Industries Ministerial Council would support the removal of the state-territory role in the Gene Technology Act.
Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I thank the member for her interesting question. (1) No. I have not been made aware of any such attempt other than anecdotally. To more correctly answer the question, I have no hard evidence of the commonwealth’s intention in that regard other than the fact that my attention has been drawn to an opinion expressed by a person about a letter that I have not seen - I refer to the anecdotal reference. I have no hard evidence that we are making attempts to determine whether such a letter exists that purports to give that view. The Genetically Modified Crops Free Areas Act 2003 and a Genetically Modified Crops Free Areas Order 2004 announced by the Premier in 2004 designate the whole state as an area in which genetically modified crops cannot be cultivated. Most states have similar moratoriums on GM food crops or GM crops. (2) I would be very disappointed if the commonwealth government undermines the position of any of the states or territories. While I say that, commonwealth law in the form of section 21 of the Gene Technology Act 2000 recognises state and territory laws established for the purpose of preserving the identity of GM crops and non-GM crops for market purposes. Were the commonwealth to consider such action, it would be necessary for section 21 of that act to be amended. It is unlikely that the Primary Industries Ministerial Council would support the removal of the state-territory role in the Gene Technology Act.
I thank the member for her interesting question. (1) No. I have not been made aware of any such attempt other than anecdotally. To more correctly answer the question, I have no hard evidence of the commonwealth’s intention in that regard other than the fact that my attention has been drawn to an opinion expressed by a person about a letter that I have not seen - I refer to the anecdotal reference. I have no hard evidence that we are making attempts to determine whether such a letter exists that purports to give that view. The Genetically Modified Crops Free Areas Act 2003 and a Genetically Modified Crops Free Areas Order 2004 announced by the Premier in 2004 designate the whole state as an area in which genetically modified crops cannot be cultivated. Most states have similar moratoriums on GM food crops or GM crops. (2) I would be very disappointed if the commonwealth government undermines the position of any of the states or territories. While I say that, commonwealth law in the form of section 21 of the Gene Technology Act 2000 recognises state and territory laws established for the purpose of preserving the identity of GM crops and non-GM crops for market purposes. Were the commonwealth to consider such action, it would be necessary for section 21 of that act to be amended. It is unlikely that the Primary Industries Ministerial Council would support the removal of the state-territory role in the Gene Technology Act.
(1) No. I have not been made aware of any such attempt other than anecdotally. To more correctly answer the question, I have no hard evidence of the commonwealth’s intention in that regard other than the fact that my attention has been drawn to an opinion expressed by a person about a letter that I have not seen - I refer to the anecdotal reference. I have no hard evidence that we are making attempts to determine whether such a letter exists that purports to give that view. The Genetically Modified Crops Free Areas Act 2003 and a Genetically Modified Crops Free Areas Order 2004 announced by the Premier in 2004 designate the whole state as an area in which genetically modified crops cannot be cultivated. Most states have similar moratoriums on GM food crops or GM crops. (2) I would be very disappointed if the commonwealth government undermines the position of any of the states or territories. While I say that, commonwealth law in the form of section 21 of the Gene Technology Act 2000 recognises state and territory laws established for the purpose of preserving the identity of GM crops and non-GM crops for market purposes. Were the commonwealth to consider such action, it would be necessary for section 21 of that act to be amended. It is unlikely that the Primary Industries Ministerial Council would support the removal of the state-territory role in the Gene Technology Act.
(1) Is the minister aware of any attempts by the commonwealth government to override the state moratorium? (2) How would the minister view such attempts if they were made by the commonwealth? Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I thank the member for her interesting question. (1) No. I have not been made aware of any such attempt other than anecdotally. To more correctly answer the question, I have no hard evidence of the commonwealth’s intention in that regard other than the fact that my attention has been drawn to an opinion expressed by a person about a letter that I have not seen - I refer to the anecdotal reference. I have no hard evidence that we are making attempts to determine whether such a letter exists that purports to give that view. The Genetically Modified Crops Free Areas Act 2003 and a Genetically Modified Crops Free Areas Order 2004 announced by the Premier in 2004 designate the whole state as an area in which genetically modified crops cannot be cultivated. Most states have similar moratoriums on GM food crops or GM crops. (2) I would be very disappointed if the commonwealth government undermines the position of any of the states or territories. While I say that, commonwealth law in the form of section 21 of the Gene Technology Act 2000 recognises state and territory laws established for the purpose of preserving the identity of GM crops and non-GM crops for market purposes. Were the commonwealth to consider such action, it would be necessary for section 21 of that act to be amended. It is unlikely that the Primary Industries Ministerial Council would support the removal of the state-territory role in the Gene Technology Act.
(2) How would the minister view such attempts if they were made by the commonwealth? Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I thank the member for her interesting question. (1) No. I have not been made aware of any such attempt other than anecdotally. To more correctly answer the question, I have no hard evidence of the commonwealth’s intention in that regard other than the fact that my attention has been drawn to an opinion expressed by a person about a letter that I have not seen - I refer to the anecdotal reference. I have no hard evidence that we are making attempts to determine whether such a letter exists that purports to give that view. The Genetically Modified Crops Free Areas Act 2003 and a Genetically Modified Crops Free Areas Order 2004 announced by the Premier in 2004 designate the whole state as an area in which genetically modified crops cannot be cultivated. Most states have similar moratoriums on GM food crops or GM crops. (2) I would be very disappointed if the commonwealth government undermines the position of any of the states or territories. While I say that, commonwealth law in the form of section 21 of the Gene Technology Act 2000 recognises state and territory laws established for the purpose of preserving the identity of GM crops and non-GM crops for market purposes. Were the commonwealth to consider such action, it would be necessary for section 21 of that act to be amended. It is unlikely that the Primary Industries Ministerial Council would support the removal of the state-territory role in the Gene Technology Act.
Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I thank the member for her interesting question. (1) No. I have not been made aware of any such attempt other than anecdotally. To more correctly answer the question, I have no hard evidence of the commonwealth’s intention in that regard other than the fact that my attention has been drawn to an opinion expressed by a person about a letter that I have not seen - I refer to the anecdotal reference. I have no hard evidence that we are making attempts to determine whether such a letter exists that purports to give that view. The Genetically Modified Crops Free Areas Act 2003 and a Genetically Modified Crops Free Areas Order 2004 announced by the Premier in 2004 designate the whole state as an area in which genetically modified crops cannot be cultivated. Most states have similar moratoriums on GM food crops or GM crops. (2) I would be very disappointed if the commonwealth government undermines the position of any of the states or territories. While I say that, commonwealth law in the form of section 21 of the Gene Technology Act 2000 recognises state and territory laws established for the purpose of preserving the identity of GM crops and non-GM crops for market purposes. Were the commonwealth to consider such action, it would be necessary for section 21 of that act to be amended. It is unlikely that the Primary Industries Ministerial Council would support the removal of the state-territory role in the Gene Technology Act.
I thank the member for her interesting question. (1) No. I have not been made aware of any such attempt other than anecdotally. To more correctly answer the question, I have no hard evidence of the commonwealth’s intention in that regard other than the fact that my attention has been drawn to an opinion expressed by a person about a letter that I have not seen - I refer to the anecdotal reference. I have no hard evidence that we are making attempts to determine whether such a letter exists that purports to give that view. The Genetically Modified Crops Free Areas Act 2003 and a Genetically Modified Crops Free Areas Order 2004 announced by the Premier in 2004 designate the whole state as an area in which genetically modified crops cannot be cultivated. Most states have similar moratoriums on GM food crops or GM crops. (2) I would be very disappointed if the commonwealth government undermines the position of any of the states or territories. While I say that, commonwealth law in the form of section 21 of the Gene Technology Act 2000 recognises state and territory laws established for the purpose of preserving the identity of GM crops and non-GM crops for market purposes. Were the commonwealth to consider such action, it would be necessary for section 21 of that act to be amended. It is unlikely that the Primary Industries Ministerial Council would support the removal of the state-territory role in the Gene Technology Act.
(1) No. I have not been made aware of any such attempt other than anecdotally. To more correctly answer the question, I have no hard evidence of the commonwealth’s intention in that regard other than the fact that my attention has been drawn to an opinion expressed by a person about a letter that I have not seen - I refer to the anecdotal reference. I have no hard evidence that we are making attempts to determine whether such a letter exists that purports to give that view. The Genetically Modified Crops Free Areas Act 2003 and a Genetically Modified Crops Free Areas Order 2004 announced by the Premier in 2004 designate the whole state as an area in which genetically modified crops cannot be cultivated. Most states have similar moratoriums on GM food crops or GM crops. (2) I would be very disappointed if the commonwealth government undermines the position of any of the states or territories. While I say that, commonwealth law in the form of section 21 of the Gene Technology Act 2000 recognises state and territory laws established for the purpose of preserving the identity of GM crops and non-GM crops for market purposes. Were the commonwealth to consider such action, it would be necessary for section 21 of that act to be amended. It is unlikely that the Primary Industries Ministerial Council would support the removal of the state-territory role in the Gene Technology Act.
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.