‘Inaccuracies’ in report on pesticides

Press, 13 May 1989, Page 2

‘Inaccuracies’ in report on pesticides

By

DAVID LUCAS,

farm reporter

Several inaccuracies were contained in a report suggesting New Zealand’s clean, green image depended heavily on pesticides, the acting director-general of agriculture, Mr Royce Elliott, said.

He said it was wrong to suggest that more pesticides than necessary were used to bring produce to export standard. “In fact the reverse is true. We produce food for some of the most environmentally conscious countries in the world, which have strict limits on the amount of chemical residue allowed on produce. “If we didn’t adhere to these limits then we wouldn’t be earning $6 billion a year from agricultural and horticultural products.” Primary producer boards had received no overseas reaction yesterday to the discussion document prepared for the Environment Ministry by two Lincoln College researchers and released on Thursday, which warned against the continued heavy use of pestiNew... Zealand - agriculture. =,• : X'.wSehior j Ministry of, AgXgfi2ultiir&“.officials were Wt •« report might " arouse - concern among New Zealand’s overseas customers. Spokesmen for the dairy, apple and pear and

meat producers’ boards said no negative reaction to the report had been received from overseas. Exports were. subject to tough standards set by the European Community and > the United States Department of Agriculture. Mr Elliott said he disagreed with suggestions in the report that New Zealanders were exposed to potentially large amounts of chemical residues in their food. Most primary produce went through well proven export testing systems which ensured that New Zealand consumers got the same low residue levels as demanded by overseas customers. “This includes all meat, dairy produce and the major part of pipfruit and kiwifruit production,” he said. The Ministry was taking seriously the allegation that there were gaps in the domestic monitoring of chemical residues arid;;.; in conjunction with the Health Department, had stepped up its monitoring . programme to see if these gaps existed, he said. The Apple and Pear

Board emphasised that the board’s fruit sold, on the domestic market was subject to exactly the same controls as export fruit. . Suggestions that New Zealanders were being fed fruit poisoned by pesticides were not true in the case of apples and pears, said the board’s corporate research manager, Dr John FieldDodgson. The report has been criticised by Federated Farmers as a sloppy, unprofessional document which was short on fact and relied heavily on innuendo. The federation’s president, Mr Brian Chamberlin, said the report was a thinly disguised attempt by the Environment Ministry to enlarge its empire. New Zealand used far fewer pesticides than many overseas countries anri the system bf monitoring and registration erisured that pesticides were used sensibly and well within the bounds of safety in terms of human health, said Mr Chamberlin.