Biotech Industry could be labelled Terrorists
The new Terror Bill could make companies and individuals pushing for GE release in New Zealand liable to prosecution as
terrorists. Politicians have commented that so-called "Anti-GE" protesters could be the first target of the Crimes Act
amendment, prescribing up to seven years jail for anyone threatening actions causing ‘major economic loss to one or more
persons’. However the BERL economic report and comments from Former British Environment Minister on the damage to our
economy from GE contamination signals that elements of the Biotech industry itself would be liable to prosecution.
The threat to New Zealand from companies demanding to release GE organisms is now clear. They are literally threatening
our exports, the livelihoods of farmers, community values and future generations.
Last week former British environment minister Michael Meacher told the Dominion Post ( August 7th) that New Zealand
should protect its economy by staying GE-free in food production. Mr Meacher wrote:
There are parallels between the British and New Zealand debates on genetic modification. Both nations are led by Labour
governments that have argued the benefits of releasing GE organisms despite significant public opposition. Both face
decisions in a matter of months on whether to formally clear the way for GE crops to be grown.
In preparation for this, the British Government has recently received advice that may have dampened prime minister Tony
Blair’s willingness to allow genetically modified foods to be grown in Britain. The Cabinet strategy unit reported, last
month that “any economic benefits from commercial cultivation of current GE crops are likely to be outweighed by other
developments, at least in the short term.”
It stated that producing GE products “ could leave farmers facing a low market price, or in the extreme, no market at
all”.
This was underlined by representations from food retailers. The British Retail Consortium, representing 90% of food
retailers, told the government that “supermarkets are not going to give shelf space to something that doesn’t sell”.
Given this rejection of GE foods in Britain and by the majority of Europeans, I was surprised to find that the
production of GE crops in New Zealand is still an open question.
New Zealand has a reputation throughout Europe, its principal food export market, as a source of clean and pure produce.
A reputation that was in no small part earned by your nation’s brave stance against another unnecessary and unsafe
technology: nuclear power. To an outsider it seems extraordinary that New Zealand would risk this international image
through allowing the growing of GE crops. Last week, I visited Canada and witnessed first-hand extensive contamination
of their fields with GE canola. The reality is that you cannot have co-existence of conventional and GE: it simply
doesn’t work.
Further Reference:
Terror bill undermines civil liberties, warn Greens
The Green Party is warning that New Zealanders’ rights to protest and to strike could be threatened by provisions
contained in the Counter-Terrorism Bill, which was reported back to Parliament today.
“We shouldn’t give the police the extra powers contained in the bill, or expand the Crimes Act to enable advocates of
non-violent protest to be jailed,” said Keith Locke, the Green Human Rights spokesperson.
“Amendments to criminal legislation, with no particular reference to terrorism, are being smuggled in under the guise of
what is misleadingly called a ‘Counter-Terrorism’ bill.”
Mr Locke warned that three of the bill’s provisions, amending the Crimes Act, Summary Proceedings Act and Misuse of
Drugs Act, are particularly intrusive.
“Police will now have a generalised power, under warrant, to put tracking devices on people.
“When searching premises police will be able to demand computer passwords and encryption devices, even though this
breaches a person’s right to avoid self-incrimination.
“Also, police ‘fishing expeditions’ are made easier because they will be able to use interception warrants issued for
one purpose to be used to look for evidence on a whole range of crimes.”
“Anti-GE protesters could be the first target of another Crimes Act amendment, prescribing up to seven years jail for
anyone threatening actions causing ‘major economic loss to one or more persons’,” Keith Locke pointed out. “Strikes
could also be inhibited by this provision.
“Even though the legislation says a strike or a protest ‘by itself’ is not a crime, it’s clear that an intention to
damage a GE crop or bring a worksite to a standstill could still put you foul of the law.
“Another part of the bill amends the Terrorism Suppression Act.
“While the Green Party supports compliance with international conventions on the misuse of nuclear materials and plastic
explosives, there is an intrinsic problem in the original Act’s overly broad definition of terrorism that places
innocent protesters or international solidarity activists at risk. The process of designating who is a terrorist is
still too politicised and secretive,” said Mr Locke.