JUNE 2026
CLARIFICATION About Food Law and The Environment:
WHAT'S ON THE TABLE BILL WISE IN NZ:
1.
The Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Amendment Bill (HSNO) submissions
closed
June 15.
Read a summary of the bill
>here
View The Letter template below or
>click here
Ask your MP
for an extension for the HSNO bill
2.
Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Amendment Bill (ACVM)
No Harm To Food Opposes This Bill, submissions
closed
June 15
Ask your MP
for an extension for the ACVM bill
The bill forms part of a broader shift in how agricultural and veterinary products are regulated in New Zealand wording is not precise enough to prevent the unintended approval or release of genetically modified organisms. This represents a significant regulatory gap.
3.
The Gene Technology Bill is still proposed.
Tell your MP No you don't want it Templates are below or
click >here
4.
NZ proposed to raise allowed glyphosate residue levels by up to 100x in some grains (e.g. wheat) and 60× for dry field peas.
After public submissions, they kept the cereal limit at the old level (0.1 mg/kg), but still approved 6 mg/kg for dry peas - which is 60x higher than the current limit.
When writing to your MP about the Gene Tech Bill. It will help to state you're against glyphosate in food and that you want organic practices prioritised in NZ.
The Full HSNO Bill:
https://www.legislation.govt.nz/bill/government/2026/305/en/latest/
➜ HSNO Submission Page:
https://www3.parliament.nz/en/pb/sc/committees-press-releases/have-your-say-on-the-hazardous-substances-and-new-organisms-amendment-bill/
Submission Template:
↓
Subject: Opposition to the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Amendment Bill
To the Primary Production Committee,
I am writing to strongly oppose the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Amendment Bill.
After reviewing summaries of the bill and sections of the legislation itself, I am deeply concerned about the direction these proposed changes would take New Zealand in relation to hazardous substances, genetically modified organisms (GMOs), agricultural chemicals, environmental protections, and food systems.
I am particularly concerned about:
• expanded “rapid assessment” and “light-touch” approval pathways
• increased reliance on overseas regulators
• reduced public notification requirements
• increased delegation of decision-making powers
• pathways allowing some conditionally released GMOs to later be released with fewer or no HSNO controls
• potential impacts on organic, non-GMO, and sustainable farming systems
I believe New Zealand should be strengthening precautionary protections, transparency, public participation, and independent oversight — not reducing them.
I am also concerned that many New Zealanders remain unaware of the scale and significance of the proposed regulatory changes contained within this bill. I urge you to extend the deadline for submissions.
Please also consider the broader environmental, economic, and public interest concerns connected to these proposed changes.
Across multiple environmental and social issues, surveys show strong public preference for ethical and environmentally responsible investment practices. A 2024 survey reported that 75% of New Zealanders wanted to avoid investing in companies involved in genetic engineering (GMOs), while large majorities also wanted to avoid sectors linked to environmental degradation, labour rights violations, and human rights concerns.
I am also concerned about potential risks associated with genetically engineered systems, including unintended ecological impacts, gene flow, antibiotic resistance concerns, and broader environmental consequences.
Organic and genetically engineered systems are also difficult to genuinely separate once contamination pathways such as pollen drift, seed movement, and supply-chain mixing are considered. International examples, including Mexico’s constitutional protections around native maize varieties, demonstrate growing global concern around protecting biodiversity, food sovereignty, and traditional agricultural systems.
Did you know that New Zealand’s organic sector has reached approximately NZ$1.18 billion in value.
There are also broader economic risks. The Sustainable Business Council’s members collectively represent NZ$169 billion in annual turnover, reflecting the economic scale of businesses committed to sustainability in New Zealand. Sustainability-focused sectors including eco-tourism, sustainable construction, responsible investment, and organic production are growing rapidly both nationally and internationally.
Bear in mind that around 30 countries have banned or restricted GMOs for environmental, agricultural, biodiversity, and public health reasons. The future of the world is increasingly focused on sustainability, environmentally responsible food systems, and clean agriculture. New Zealand is currently in a prime position to capitalise on this and potentially lead the way internationally — but many New Zealanders are concerned this opportunity may be undermined if the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Amendment Bill proceeds.
New Zealand has built an international reputation around environmental quality, sustainable food production, and clean agricultural systems. I believe changes that may weaken oversight of hazardous substances and new organisms risk damaging public trust, food sovereignty, environmental protections, and the future of organic and non-GMO farming in New Zealand.
I strongly oppose this bill and ask that it be removed. I do not want GE in NZ.
Thank you for considering my submission.
Kind regards,
[Your Name]
[Optional: Region / City]
References:
Gene Escape:
https://biosafety-info.net/articles/biosafety-science/horizontal-gene-transfer/horizontal-gene-transfer-the-hidden-hazards-of-genetic-engineering/
Investments
https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/67a17dcc2362afe3723b9c97/6850b4471db834eb99a1a8da_RIAA-Responsible-Investment-Benchmark-Report-Aotearoa-New-Zealand-2024_compressed.pdf
The OANZ market report and supporting coverage state that New Zealand’s organic sector reached NZ$1.18 billion in value in 2024.
https://www.oanz.org/new-blog/Organic%20Sector%20Tops%20%241.18%20Billion
The Full Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Amendment Bill:
https://www.legislation.govt.nz/bill/government/2026/305/en/latest/
➜ ACVM Submission Page:
https://www3.parliament.nz/mi/ECommitteeSubmission/54SCPRIP_SCF_18501611-43A3-4ECB-DD17-08DEAEFC95CF/CreateSubmission/
Submission Template: Please use your own words.
If you want more info about reasons to oppose, click to visit OANZ
here
↓
Subject: Opposition To The Full Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Amendment Bill:
Comment:
- I do not support the ACVM Amendment Bill and recommend that it is abolished.
If it is not withdrawn, I request that the consultation period be extended by at least one year to ensure adequate time for meaningful public input, given the scope and implications of the proposed changes.
I am writing to formally oppose the Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Amendment Bill. As a New Zealander, I am seriously concerned that this Bill would enable the approval of agricultural compounds involving gene technology without sufficient oversight, safeguards, or transparency.
In combination with the HSNO Amendment Bill and the Gene Technology Bill, it creates a cumulative and significant risk to New Zealand’s GE-free status.
I urge the committee to recommend that this Bill does not proceed.
Recommendations:
- This bill should not proceed because, together with the related gene technology and HSNO reforms, which I strongly oppose, (these bills should be removed for the sake of health), it forms part of a broader shift in how agricultural and veterinary products are regulated in New Zealand.
These changes move decision-making toward faster, more flexible regulatory pathways with greater reliance on technical agencies rather than strong, precautionary oversight and full public scrutiny for each significant approval.
Given the importance of these substances to food safety, environmental protection, and farming systems, the combined effect of these reforms weakens standards of caution and transparency. A precautionary, fully publicly accountable system is needed to protect food systems, biodiversity, and public confidence.
A glyphosate safety paper that was widely cited for food regulation (including allowing weed killer residues in food) was recently retracted due to:
-Undisclosed financial ties to Monsanto (Monsanto was acquired by Bayer in 2018)
-Ghostwriting by Monsanto employees
-Misrepresentation of author independence
-Dependence mainly on unpublished Monsanto-provided studies
-Omission or minimisation of other existing toxicity/carcinogenicity research available at the time
This should make NZ aware - that we should not be using agencies to tell us what to do.
The ACVM Act regulates agricultural compounds, including biological agents used in farming. The proposed changes in the Bill may enable biological compounds containing gene technology to be assessed and approved under the ACVM framework without the level of oversight currently required under the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (HSNO) Act.
The current definition of “biological compound” in the ACVM Act is not sufficiently precise to prevent the unintended approval or release of genetically modified organisms. This represents a significant regulatory gap.
New Zealanders have a right to clear and transparent information about whether products approved for use in farming and the food system involve gene technology. This Bill does not adequately guarantee that transparency. There is no reason to have this bill.
Please stop changing the food systems of New Zealand, there is no justification.
Stand up for NZ health & food safety
Updated Flyers Are Coming Soon
To help create awareness here is a PDF letter style flyer you can download and print to send to Marae, display on noticeboards, or use for letterbox drops. It's a public service notice so it can be put it up at your church or library etc. Or email it to friends.
Please write to your MP
Tips:
CC other MPs in for maximum exposure.
- Attach your file to the email but also upload it to somewhere like Google Drive. (Right click to set the options to 'Viewer' and 'Anyone with the link' - can access.
- Put the link set to a small font in your email in case the attachment drops off the email. To make sure they get it!
- “Please find attached our document, or view it here if the attachment does not appear: [Google Drive link]”
RE: Urgent Concerns About the Proposed Gene Technology Bill and Glyphosate Residue Increases
Affecting New Zealanders’ Health and Food Safety
Summary:
• Two major policy changes—the proposed Gene Technology Bill and recent increases to allowable glyphosate residues in some foods—pose significant risks to public health, food safety, and New Zealand’s environment.
• Independent research has linked glyphosate and gene-edited crops to hormone disruption, cancer, changes in the gut microbiome, biodiversity loss, and increased chemical residues in food.
• Economic and social consequences could affect sustainable sectors, organic markets, responsible investment, and tourism.
• Strong public concern exists, as surveys show that 75–89% of New Zealanders prefer to avoid GMOs and sectors linked to environmental degradation.
• Responsible policy alternatives exist.
Dear (Insert Name)
CC: (Insert any CC’d contacts)
I am writing as a concerned constituent regarding recent and proposed government changes that would significantly impact public health, food safety, and New Zealand’s environmental integrity:
• The Gene Technology Bill.
• The Glyphosate Increases (Maximum Residue Level (MRL) Increase).
Both initiatives are being advanced with minimal public awareness, yet they have far-reaching implications for our health, food quality, and international reputation. Please find relevant research studies in the footer.
A glyphosate safety study published in 2000 and widely relied upon by regulators was formally retracted in 2025 following evidence of undisclosed industry involvement and ghost-writing. This highlights the importance of transparency and independent scientific review in public health policy.
Gene Technology Bill – Risks of Deregulation
The proposed changes are being presented as “science-based” innovation. However, they bypass internationally recognised biosafety standards, including risk assessment, long-term ecological monitoring, and transparency. Gene-edited plants—engineered for pesticide resistance—could reach supermarket shelves with minimal oversight.
Independent studies indicate that such crops lead to:
• Increased pesticide use
• Soil degradation and biodiversity loss
• Higher chemical residues in food
• Hormone disruption and increased cancer risks
• Other health diseases, such as Parkinson’s
New Zealand’s organic sector has grown to around NZ$1.8 billion in revenue (2025 Organic Market Report), reflecting strong consumer demand for chemical-free, safe food. A more sustainable path forward includes supporting organic and chemical-spray-free farming, as well as strengthening transparency in food labelling. However, awareness of the Gene Technology Bill and glyphosate increase is limited because, while the organic sector is valuable annually, many Kiwis can’t afford to buy organics regularly. They may miss news circulating within organic and sustainability circles.
But many NZ home gardeners often reject chemical sprays and genetically engineered foods. ‘Spray-free’ produce is in demand at local and online markets. Organic, GE, and market group sectors actively promote these choices, and the turnout and social media comments for natural expos, which draw tens of thousands of attendees each year, demonstrate a strong and growing public interest.
Economic and Sectoral Risks
There are economic risks: The Sustainable Business Council’s members collectively represent NZ$169 billion in annual turnover, reflecting the significant economic scale of businesses committed to sustainability in NZ.
The Gene Technology Bill (and glyphosate increases) could threaten key sectors:
• Sustainable construction: NZ$5 billion/year, projected NZ$142 billion by 2050, dependent on healthy biodiversity and uncontaminated natural resources.
• Responsible investment: NZ$153.5 billion in ESG-aligned funds, with NZ$4.74 billion in impact investments. Many exclude high chemical/GMO exposure; these changes could trigger divestment.
• Sustainable tourism: Tourism contributes around NZ$40 billion annually to New Zealand’s economy. The sustainable and eco-tourism sectors are growing rapidly. The New Zealand sustainable tourism market is projected to grow from USD 12.7 million in 2025 to USD 57.7 million by 2035, representing a Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) of 16.3%.
A 2024 survey shows that 75% of New Zealanders want to avoid investing in companies involved in genetic engineering (GMOs).
These sectors depend heavily on New Zealand’s clean environment, biodiversity, and food integrity to attract discerning international visitors. Pristine landscapes and natural food systems, prized especially in markets sensitive to GMOs such as the EU and Japan, are key assets for sustaining this growth.
Glyphosate Increases – Escalating Health Risks
Increasing glyphosate residue limits—in certain crops—is concerning, given growing evidence of its health risks. International research suggests glyphosate:
• Can accumulate in breast milk and body tissues
• Disrupts gut health, hormone balance, and DNA integrity
• Could impair cognition and behaviour in adolescents
• Increases the risk of non-Hodgkin lymphoma
Approx. 20 countries worldwide are banning or phasing out the use of glyphosate. With many EU countries that have voted against it for upcoming reforms.
New Zealand should align with international safety standards, not permit higher exposures to a known carcinogen.
A Call for Responsible Policy
It is possible to support farmers while prioritising public health, environmental protection, and sustainable food production. Transparent labelling, stricter monitoring, and investment in organic and regenerative farming are proven ways to achieve these goals.
Please consider the independent scientific research and public concern regarding these proposals. Protecting New Zealanders’ health and food safety should be a top priority.
Thank you for your time and attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Your Name.
__________________________________________
References & Supporting Scientific Studies (Footnote)
Glyphosate Health Risks
- Ramazzini Institute (2018) – Early-life exposures disrupt development, gut microbiome, hormone levels, and DNA integrity: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5972398/?utm_source
- Panzacchi et al., 2025 – Lifetime exposure to glyphosate at low doses in rats caused benign and malignant tumours: https://ehjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12940-025-01187-2
- NHANES Analysis, 2013–14 – Higher urinary glyphosate associated with memory loss, depression, and hearing difficulties: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S001393512301664X
- Ecuador Teen Study – Adolescent glyphosate exposure linked to poorer attention, memory, language, and inhibitory control: https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1003778
- Rodent study – Maternal glyphosate exposure caused autism-like behaviours in offspring: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32398374/
- Environmental Health (2022) – Glyphosate detected in 99% of pregnant women; higher exposure associated with shorter pregnancies: https://ehjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12940-022-00906-3?utm_source
- Oxidative organ damage – Glyphosate provokes oxidative damage in rat liver and kidneys: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4756530/?utm_source
- Glyphosate in breast milk – Linked to infant deaths in India: https://beyondpesticides.org/dailynewsblog/2023/02/pesticides-in-breast-milk-linked-to-over-100-newborn-deaths-in-less-than-a-year/
- C&EN: Glyphosate study from 2000 retracted amid corporate-influence concerns
https://cen.acs.org/research-integrity/misconduct/Glyphosate-study-2000-retracted-amid/103/web/2025/12?utm_source=chatgpt.com
Gene Technology & GMO Concerns
- Gene-edited crops lead to increased pesticide use, soil degradation, biodiversity loss, and the presence of chemical residues in food.
- Monte Maíz, Argentina – High glyphosate exposure linked to cancer incidence 225% above national average; mortality 232.7% higher; spontaneous abortion 10% vs 3%; congenital abnormalities 4.3% vs 1.4%: https://www.scirp.org/html/4-6703530_83267.htm
- Pesticide effects on human health, from acute intoxication to chronic diseases that include various types of cancer (brain cancer, breast cancer, prostate cancer, bladder cancer, and colon cancer) [11,12], Alzheimer’s disease (AD) [13], Parkinson’s disease [14], neurotoxicity [15,16], infertility [17,18], leukemia [19] and diabetes” https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405844024051594
- A medical study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association about Parkinson’s Disease (PD) finds that: “Living within 1 mile of a golf course was associated with 126% increased odds of developing PD compared with individuals living more than 6 miles away from a golf course.” These findings suggest that pesticides applied to golf courses may play a role in the incidence of PD for nearby residents. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2833716?utm_campaign=articlePDF&utm_medium=articlePDFlink&utm_source=articlePDF&utm_content=jamanetworkopen.2025.9198
___________________________________________
Sustainable Investment Preferences:
- 75% want to avoid investing in companies involved in genetic engineering (GMOs).
- Shows public opposition to GMOs, directly supporting resistance to the Gene Technology Bill that would deregulate oversight of gene-edited agricultural products.
- 89% want to avoid sectors linked to environmental degradation (air, land, and water damage).
- Strengthens the case against the Glyphosate Increase Bill, as glyphosate use is tied to soil degradation, biodiversity loss, and water contamination.
Refs:
- https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/67a17dcc2362afe3723b9c97/6850b4471db834eb99a1a8da_RIAA-Responsible-Investment-Benchmark-Report-Aotearoa-New-Zealand-2024_compressed.pdf
- https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/67a17dcc2362afe3723b9c97/67da52588efb4602d3e83ed6_Voices-of-Aotearoa-Demand-for-Ethical-Investment-in-New-Zealand-2024.pdf
COUNTRIES THAT HAVE BANNED THE CULTIVATION OF GENETICALLY MODIFIED (GM) CROPS DESIGNED TO BE PESTICIDE-RESISTANT, WITH SOME ALSO RESTRICTING IMPORTS:
European Union:
Historically, significant number of EU member states have banned or restricted GMO cultivation, including France, Germany, Austria, Greece, Hungary, the Netherlands, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Bulgaria, Poland, Denmark, Malta, Slovenia, Italy, and Croatia.
In June 2026, despite passionate opposition from parents, farmers, consumer groups, and environmental organisations across Europe, the European Parliament approved new rules removing GMO-style labelling requirements for many gene-edited crops. The public majority describe the decision as making food transparency and consumer choice impossible. Consumers do not want gene-edited foods to enter supermarkets without clear identification for shoppers. Consumers also do not want gene-edited foods in the food supply at all. The public describe patents being pushed upon them against their will.
Other European Countries:
Russia and Switzerland also have had bans or restrictions on GMO cultivation.
Asia-Pacific:
Australia, Turkey, Kyrgyzstan, Bhutan, Japan, and Saudi Arabia are among the countries with restrictions or bans.
Example: Japan has no domestic cultivation of food crops.
(In Japan Mandatory Labelling: Designated imported GM crops like soybeans, corn, potatoes, rapeseed, cottonseed, alfalfa, and sugar beet, as well as certain processed foods, are subject to mandatory labelling if GM DNA or protein is detectable).
Africa:
Many African countries have either banned or have significant restrictions on GMO cultivation. Countries like Algeria and Madagascar are mentioned as having bans in place.
Americas:
Belize, Ecuador, Mexico, Peru, and Venezuela have also banned or restricted GMO cultivation.
Other notable examples:
China and India are also mentioned as having bans or restrictions, according to the National Institutes of Health (NIH).
Trade Concerns:
Many countries have raised concerns that weaker GMO regulations may threaten trade access and export reputation with markets that maintain stricter GMO standards, particularly within the EU.
World Refs: According to official government regulations and international reports from bodies such as the European Commission, the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), and national agricultural and environmental ministries, many countries have implemented bans or strict restrictions on glyphosate use and the cultivation of genetically modified crops designed to be pesticide-resistant.
