I rise to speak in the debate on the Gene Technology Amendment Bill 2007. The prominence of gene technology and genetically modified products is increasing in our community at a steady pace. For a quarter of a century people in Australia and all over the world with type 1 diabetes have used insulin produced by genetically modified bacteria. This is an example of a product derived from a genetically modified organism that is injected into the body fat and tissue of people without harmful effect.
However, with rapid advances in science and technology it is critical that the legislative framework enabling gene technology regulation in Queensland and Australia is carefully monitored and reviewed. The review of the Queensland Gene Technology Act 2001, as described in this bill, is important as it amends the regulatory processes that govern gene technology. Changes are needed to keep up with scientific advancements and to ensure that the health and safety of everyone-growers, producers, manufacturers and the wider community-is protected, and the environment as well.
The object of the Queensland Gene Technology Act 2001 is to protect the health and safety of people and the environment by identifying risks posed by or as a result of gene technology and by managing those risks through regulating certain dealings with genetically modified organisms. This system has been achieved through the establishment of an independent statutory office holder, the Gene Technology Regulator, who has been charged with the responsibility of administering the gene technology regulation and making decisions about the development and use of genetically modified organisms.
The bill before us today will bring the Queensland Gene Technology Act 2001 into line with the recently amended Commonwealth legislation. An important change is a proposal to introduce emergency provisions into the act giving the minister the ability to expedite-
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr English): Order! There is a member on her feet. Please keep the audible conversation down.
Ms MALE: Thank you for your protection, Mr Deputy Speaker. As I was saying, an important change is the proposal to introduce emergency provisions into the act giving the minister the ability to expedite the approval of dealing with a genetically modified organism in an emergency. These emergency powers are working well, as demonstrated by the recent outbreak of equine influenza.
A genetically modified vaccine is being used to contain the spread of disease under an emergency dealing determination. However, going forward our state needs to have its own legislation in place to be able to use a genetically modified organism if shown to be harmless in other respects to protect Queenslanders in emergency situations.
The introduction of the emergency provisions into the act would also improve consistency among regulatory schemes. Other relevant product regulators, such as the Therapeutic Goods Administration for vaccines or Food Standards Australia New Zealand for food products, already possess the ability to expedite approvals in an emergency.
The second proposed amendment in this bill will reflect the Commonwealth’s move to combine the Gene Technology Ethics Committee and the Gene Technology Community Consultative Committee into one advisory committee. The role of the combined committee, which will be called the Gene Technology Ethics and Community Consultative Committee, will be to carry out the combined functions of both committees and to provide advice on risk communications and community consultations regarding intentional release licence applications. This amendment will increase efficiency by addressing the overlaps between the roles of the existing committees and the new committee and its performance will be reviewed by the Gene Technology Ministerial Council after 18 months.
This bill will effectively streamline the process for the initial consideration of licences for the release of genetically modified organisms into the environment. In altering the order of events during the initial licence consultation process, the regulator will be given more time to consider whether dealings pose a significant risk. It would no longer be required to consider whether an application poses a significant risk to the health and safety of people or the environment before preparing a risk assessment and risk management plan. As part of this particular amendment, a new category of licence will be recognised, effectively splitting licensing for dealings involving intentional releases to distinguish between licences for limited and control release-that is, field trials-and licences for commercial release. The changes proposed in this bill reflect those introduced in the Commonwealth legislation, as I have said previously. Although it will be easier for stakeholders to comply with the regulatory framework, the checks and balances needed for thorough scrutiny will be retained if provisions are breached. The increasing prominence of gene technology will be guided judiciously by this bill, ensuring the safety and health of people and the environment. I commend the bill to the House.
