Pesticide-use report under fire again

Press, 28 June 1989, Page 3

Pesticide-use report under fire again

PA Wellington The Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries has again attacked a Lincoln College report on pesti-cide-use in New Zealand, accusing it of bias and poor analysis. The report, released last month, angered farmers by suggesting New Zealand consumers were eating food with high pesticide residues. In its pesticide study submissions on resource management law reform, M.A.F. said the report contained technical errors and omissions and had a consistent bias towards "unresolvable uncertainties.”

The acting DirectorGeneral of Agriculture, Mr Royce Elliott, said the report had a poor appreciation of the monitoring of primary produce for overseas markets and for domestic consumption. Its economic analysis of policy choices was faulty. “Sadly, the report has little credibility as a basis for sound change to pesticide regulation in New Zealand,” said

Mr Elliott. One of the authors of the report, Professor David Penman, said it was disappointing M.A.F. was being so defensive about the report. He admitted there were errors in the report, which had had to be done quickly. Some facts were wrong and the economic analysis was flawed. “Still, we were unbiased, making our best analysis of the evidence put before us.” If there was information not covered in the report, then it would be helpful if M.A.F. made it available, for example, an economic analysis of choices. The Ministry was not picking up positive leads, but since the report had questioned some of the Ministry’s actions, it was not surprising it should run for cover. Professor Penman said he felt happy the main aim of the project had been met — to stimulate informed debate on the pesticides issue.