❓ A parliamentary question regarding concerns about CSIRO trials of genetically modified wheat in eastern states and their relevance to Western Australia. The Minister's response defends the scientific process and regulatory oversight of GM crop trials.
AnsweredQoN 448Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
GENETICALLY
MODIFIED WHEAT — TRIALS
448. Mr F.A. ALBAN to the Minister for Agriculture and Food:
As a former wheat grower in both Victoria and New South
Wales, I noted with interest in the media this morning that some concerns have
been raised about a variety of genetically modified wheat being trialled by the
CSIRO in the eastern states.
Several members interjected.
The SPEAKER :
Member for Collie–Preston, I do not think I gave you the call. I
formally call you to order for the first time today.
Mr F.A. ALBAN : Can
the Minister for Agriculture and Food please provide more information about
these trials and what relevance they have, if any, to Western Australia?
MODIFIED WHEAT — TRIALS
448. Mr F.A. ALBAN to the Minister for Agriculture and Food:
As a former wheat grower in both Victoria and New South
Wales, I noted with interest in the media this morning that some concerns have
been raised about a variety of genetically modified wheat being trialled by the
CSIRO in the eastern states.
Several members interjected.
The SPEAKER :
Member for Collie–Preston, I do not think I gave you the call. I
formally call you to order for the first time today.
Mr F.A. ALBAN : Can
the Minister for Agriculture and Food please provide more information about
these trials and what relevance they have, if any, to Western Australia?
AnswerView source ↗
Just before I respond to the
question, I acknowledge, on behalf of the member for Dawesville—the
Minister for Health—the students of Dawesville Catholic Primary School
who are in the Speaker's gallery; they are most welcome in Parliament
today.
I thank the member for Swan Hills
for the question, and for his interest in this subject; given that he was a
wheat farmer in bygone years, I am pleased he has taken the time to ask this
question. It was very good to hear some commentary from the member for Warnbro
on the radio today. He does not comment on agriculture very often, but when he
wakes up in the morning and finds something in the paper that says ''GM'',
he arcs up and has to get in there and say something.
Several members interjected.
The
SPEAKER : I would like to be able to hear the answer, members on both sides.
Mr
D.T. REDMAN : Let us look at exactly what we are actually talking about
here; we have a scientist who is quite well known for his anti-GM position,
suggesting that a wheat variety that is still in trials could potentially cause
some health problems. The trials are being run by the Commonwealth Scientific
and Industrial Research Organisation, which is Australia's pre-eminent
scientific organisation. I might add that the trials are actually happening in
the eastern states; as I understand it, no trials are being conducted in
Western Australia—certainly no trials have been supported by the
Department of Agriculture and Food through our New Genes for New Environments
facilities.
Mr
M.P. Murray interjected.
The
SPEAKER : Member for Collie–Preston!
Mr
D.T. REDMAN : I think what has been put out by the member for Warnbro is an
absolute beat-up.
When these trials are gone through—this
is a scientific process in action—and a new variety is trialled and tested,
that is exactly what happens; it is trialled and tested, and the process is
gone through to see if it is going to stack up. If it does, it gets approved by
the appropriate federal regulatory bodies, which say that it is safe and okay
to be grown and actually will be of some sort of benefit to the industry in
Western Australia, or Australia for that matter. Once those processes have been
worked through, a decision is made about whether it is actually something that
is okay to grow.
I do not know whether the issues
raised by the professor as cited by the paper this morning are actually right
or wrong, but I do know about, and have confidence in, the regulatory processes
here in Western Australia, and that is exactly what the notion of trials is all
about. If the notion was that a trial was shut down because people did not like
what they saw, then all the trials and research in Western Australia into
pharmaceuticals and all the things that are happening would have to be shut
down. Those things appropriately happen through a scientific process to work
out whether it is appropriate to grow or produce something, and whether it is
safe for human consumption or safe to be grown.
What we are seeing here is the
typical fence-sitting position of the opposition. It chooses, depending on who
it talks to and what the forum is, to take up a different position. The member
for Warnbro has come out and made some comment supporting an article that he
spied in The West Australian when he
got up this morning, and when anti-GM positions get sent to him he picks up
those cases; he takes that position on behalf of the opposition.
If I go back to the Leader of the
Opposition's budget reply speech of this year, in which he laid out the
foundations of what the Labor Party is going to put up in Western Australia as
a potential alternative government at the next election, he said —
We will collaborate with the science
and innovation sector in an effort to build future capacity in priority areas,
which include resources, biotechnology, information and communication
technology, and medical, marine and agricultural research.
''Biotechnology'' and ''agricultural
research'' in the same sentence!
Several members interjected.
Mr
D.T. REDMAN : In that speech he went on to say, ''Labor will review
government barriers that hinder innovation'', and I can only put to the
Leader of the Opposition that barriers to research and innovation in the
agricultural sector are absolute rubbish, and the sort of position that has
been peddled by the member for Warnbro shows that the opposition is not
supporting a position that is true to science and true to the appropriate
settings that should be in place for an opposition that is trying to make a
pathway to government.
question, I acknowledge, on behalf of the member for Dawesville—the
Minister for Health—the students of Dawesville Catholic Primary School
who are in the Speaker's gallery; they are most welcome in Parliament
today.
I thank the member for Swan Hills
for the question, and for his interest in this subject; given that he was a
wheat farmer in bygone years, I am pleased he has taken the time to ask this
question. It was very good to hear some commentary from the member for Warnbro
on the radio today. He does not comment on agriculture very often, but when he
wakes up in the morning and finds something in the paper that says ''GM'',
he arcs up and has to get in there and say something.
Several members interjected.
The
SPEAKER : I would like to be able to hear the answer, members on both sides.
Mr
D.T. REDMAN : Let us look at exactly what we are actually talking about
here; we have a scientist who is quite well known for his anti-GM position,
suggesting that a wheat variety that is still in trials could potentially cause
some health problems. The trials are being run by the Commonwealth Scientific
and Industrial Research Organisation, which is Australia's pre-eminent
scientific organisation. I might add that the trials are actually happening in
the eastern states; as I understand it, no trials are being conducted in
Western Australia—certainly no trials have been supported by the
Department of Agriculture and Food through our New Genes for New Environments
facilities.
Mr
M.P. Murray interjected.
The
SPEAKER : Member for Collie–Preston!
Mr
D.T. REDMAN : I think what has been put out by the member for Warnbro is an
absolute beat-up.
When these trials are gone through—this
is a scientific process in action—and a new variety is trialled and tested,
that is exactly what happens; it is trialled and tested, and the process is
gone through to see if it is going to stack up. If it does, it gets approved by
the appropriate federal regulatory bodies, which say that it is safe and okay
to be grown and actually will be of some sort of benefit to the industry in
Western Australia, or Australia for that matter. Once those processes have been
worked through, a decision is made about whether it is actually something that
is okay to grow.
I do not know whether the issues
raised by the professor as cited by the paper this morning are actually right
or wrong, but I do know about, and have confidence in, the regulatory processes
here in Western Australia, and that is exactly what the notion of trials is all
about. If the notion was that a trial was shut down because people did not like
what they saw, then all the trials and research in Western Australia into
pharmaceuticals and all the things that are happening would have to be shut
down. Those things appropriately happen through a scientific process to work
out whether it is appropriate to grow or produce something, and whether it is
safe for human consumption or safe to be grown.
What we are seeing here is the
typical fence-sitting position of the opposition. It chooses, depending on who
it talks to and what the forum is, to take up a different position. The member
for Warnbro has come out and made some comment supporting an article that he
spied in The West Australian when he
got up this morning, and when anti-GM positions get sent to him he picks up
those cases; he takes that position on behalf of the opposition.
If I go back to the Leader of the
Opposition's budget reply speech of this year, in which he laid out the
foundations of what the Labor Party is going to put up in Western Australia as
a potential alternative government at the next election, he said —
We will collaborate with the science
and innovation sector in an effort to build future capacity in priority areas,
which include resources, biotechnology, information and communication
technology, and medical, marine and agricultural research.
''Biotechnology'' and ''agricultural
research'' in the same sentence!
Several members interjected.
Mr
D.T. REDMAN : In that speech he went on to say, ''Labor will review
government barriers that hinder innovation'', and I can only put to the
Leader of the Opposition that barriers to research and innovation in the
agricultural sector are absolute rubbish, and the sort of position that has
been peddled by the member for Warnbro shows that the opposition is not
supporting a position that is true to science and true to the appropriate
settings that should be in place for an opposition that is trying to make a
pathway to government.
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.