Yesterday (27 April 2006), the Statutory Review of the Gene Technology Act 2000 was tabled in the Australian Parliament and the independent Review Panel also presented their findings to a meeting of Australian and state and territory ministers responsible for gene technology in Melbourne.

Agrifood Awareness Australia Limited congratulated the Review Panel on a comprehensive report which reinforces Australia's world-leading, transparent, science-based gene technology regulatory framework.

Agrifood Awareness Australia Limited was encouraged by the Review Panel's recommendation to develop a national, coexistence framework for both GM and non-GM crops.

"We urge the federal and state governments to address this as a priority issue in order to ensure that Australian farmers have the genuine ability to make choices so that Australia remains in the forefront of technology adoption," said Paula Fitzgerald, Executive Director, Agrifood Awareness Australia Limited.

"The current state-based moratoria have created R&D uncertainty, provide no clear path to market for GM products, and will, if not addressed urgently, impact our scientific capacity and our global agricultural competitiveness," she said.

Agrifood Awareness Australia Limited looks forward to working with government and the agriculture sector to implement these findings.


Findings of the review include the following:

Scope of the Act - The review concluded that the existing scope of the Act should be maintained.

Act achieving its object - The review also found that the object of the Act - the protection of the health and safety and of people the environment - is being achieved. It found the Act to be rigorous, transparent, appropriate and effective. However, the operational experience of the first four years has highlighted the need for some amendments to the regulatory system.

Operation of the Act - Changes suggested by the review include:

• the consultative structure and process could be improved by ensuring that GTTAC's membership includes members with primary expertise in public health and environmental risk assessment.
• the Gene Technology Ethics Committee (GTEC) and the Gene Technology Community Consultative Committee (GTCCC) could be combined.
• the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) need no longer be consulted on all dealings involving intentional release (DIR) applications. 
• there was a case for distinguishing between field trials and commercial releases of GMOs and reducing the time limit for assessing field trial applications but extending it for commercial releases. 
• It also recommended that a time limit be introduced for consideration of licence variations.

After considering the issue in the light of the enforcement guidelines followed by the Regulator, the review concluded that the existing enforcement powers are appropriate and used proportionately.

Regulatory burden - The review recommended lessening the burden of compliance by removing any requirement to report on dealings with GMOs exempted by regulation and reducing the requirement to report on Notifiable Low Risk Dealings (NLRDs) to an annual report. It also recommended that the Regulator and AQIS work on harmonising certification requirements and introducing a system of single audits.

Interface with other systems - The review concluded that the agencies worked very well together to minimise duplication and ensure consistency and coherence. It recommended that a forum should be established to formalise these arrangements.

Changing circumstances - The review recommended that the Act should be reviewed again in five years to ensure that it continues to accommodate emerging trends. The review concluded that the Australian system is one of the most rigorous, transparent and accessible and it did not find any features in overseas systems that could be adopted to enhance the operation of the Australian system

The Inter-governmental Agreement - The major issue raised with the review in relation to the Inter-governmental Agreement on Gene Technology (IGA) was the extent to which state moratoria on the growing of GM crops had undermined the nationally consistent framework which the IGA was intended to support. The review noted that there was no evidence of adverse impacts on markets, and concluded that the moratoria were having detrimental rather than beneficial impacts. It recommended that all jurisdictions should reaffirm their commitment to a nationally consistent scheme, including a nationally consistent approach to market considerations, and work together to develop a national co-existence framework.

The Gene Technology Ministerial Council members will now develop a joint response to the Panel's recommendations regarding the operation of the Commonwealth Gene Technology Act 2000 on behalf of their governments.

Copies of the report can be found at:
www.health.gov.au/internet/wcms/publishing.nsf/Content/gtreview-report.htm

Agrifood Awareness Australia Limited is an industry initiative established in 1999, to increase public awareness of and encourage informed debate about, gene technology. The organisation is supported by three peak bodies - the National Farmers' Federation, the Grains Research and Development Corporation and CropLife Australia (formerly Avcare).