 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
We have 6 guests and 0 members online
You are an anonymous user. You can register for free by clicking here
|
|
|
|
|
· HIGH COURT RULING ON GMOs SHOWS THAT COUNCILS OF AUCKLAND/NORTHLAND PENINSULA HA
(Jun 16, 2009)
· High Court ruling gives nod to ARC’s cautious take on GMOs
(Jun 16, 2009)
· HIGH COURT GE DECISION A VICTORY FOR NEW ZEALANDERS
(Jun 07, 2009)
· GM animal applications invalid – High Court appeal upheld
(Jun 07, 2009)
· Federated Farmers of NZ praise GM free grass
(Jun 05, 2009)
· LOCAL AUTHORITIES CONSULT RATEPAYERS ON GMO LAND USE
(Apr 09, 2009)
· GMO Views To Be Aired
(Apr 07, 2009)
· Stop acting like Muppets and cancel all GE trials
(Mar 12, 2009)
· FAR NORTH DISTRICT COUNCIL JOINS OTHER LOCAL AUTHORITIES IN REGIONAL SURVEY REGA
(Oct 09, 2008)
· FAR NORTH DISTRICT COUNCIL JOINS OTHER LOCAL AUTHORITIES IN REGIONAL SURVEY REG
(Oct 09, 2008)
· Far North Joins Regional Survey on GMOs
(Oct 07, 2008)
· Mayor backs ban on GMOs
(Sep 14, 2008)
· Report exposes Government inaction over GE
(Apr 17, 2008)
· Restore Moratorium: GE FailuresThreaten National Interest
(Apr 17, 2008)
· Proposed release of GE vaccine will be protested - Greens
(Mar 13, 2008)
· Demise of GE Sapling Trees.
(Jan 18, 2008)
· Credibility of Food Safety Regulation takes a Significant Hit
(Dec 29, 2007)
· Pamela Peters
(Oct 10, 2007)
· Simon Bliss
(Oct 10, 2007)
· Jimmy Daisley
(Oct 10, 2007)
· Warren Slater
(Oct 07, 2007)
· Vince Cocurullo
(Oct 07, 2007)
· Don Hedges
(Oct 07, 2007)
· Simon Vallings
(Oct 07, 2007)
· Stan Semenoff
(Oct 07, 2007)
· GE onus belongs with polluters, central Government
(Jul 31, 2007)
· LOCAL AUTHORITIES EXPOSE FLAWS IN THE HSNO ACT WHICH MEANS THAT RESPONSIBILITY F
(Jul 25, 2007)
· Responsiblity for GE clean ups would land on local government and local land own
(Jul 24, 2007)
· Former Crop & Food Scientist says GE Brassica field test approval lacked scrutin
(Jun 02, 2007)
· GE Brassica Approval Lacks Common Sense - But Nice Job For Some
(Jun 01, 2007)
|
|
|
View all articles for this topic.
|
|
|
|
Pamela Peters responds:
I will vote to honour the commitments made in my term, and the on-going collaboration of the other Councils in Northland/Auckland peninsula
I support the statement in the WDC adopted Long Term Council Community Plan 2006-16
WHANGAREI DISTRICT COUNCIL
"Council will adopt a precautionary approach to the management of biotechnology in general and to GMO land uses in particular. It will continue to investigate ways of maintaining the district's environment free of GMOs until outstanding issues such as liability, economic costs and benefits, environmental risks, and cultural effects are resolved."
In addition, I am against field trials in our district that may involve GMO's.
I am open to scientific discovery for medical advances and/or pest control eg possums. I prefer rigorous process and considered outcomes to simply... declaring a district GE Free.
I believe the regulatory process should involve both local authorities and central government ERMA etc I believe we should continue with our regional co-ordination, lobbying, research and clarifying liability.
The concept of regional exclusion zone is not my preference. But would not rule it out in the future.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Response from Mayoral candidate Simon Bliss:
(1) Yes, I would like to see the District remain GM free, it would be impossible to remain green and clean if there are GMOs in the District.
(2) I am concerned that central government is trying to hold local bodies responsible for GMOs, it would be very wise to keep GMOs out and work with other local authorities to do the same.
(3) It appears that other regional authorities (Auckland Regional Council, Northland Regional Council) are saying no to GE modified material and organisms so it will be easy to follow suit.
After all, we can so no to nuclear energy. It’s not hard to figure out what to say to the above when it would benefit only a few.
|
|
| (1795 Reads) |
  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Response from Mayoral candidate Jimmy Daisley:
1. yes, definitely
2. Yes, there should be something in the District Plan, preferably prohibition for GMO land use but I will be guided by what ratepayers want. I am less concerned about GE experiments in the strict containment of the laboratory.
3. Yes, definitely support a Regional Exclusion Zone until GMOs are proven to be safe and a strict liability regime put in place.
|
|
| (1766 Reads) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vinces reponse to
Question #1
Yes, the release of GM into the community is not good, but this is a very good area for Binding Referenda. Just like releasing fluoride into our water, a referenda was completed, so could the public be asked again if they want a GM Free area. Because at the end of the day, it is what the whole community wants not just what I want.
Question 2 response:
Once again, when we are refering to the whole district, we must include the whole district in the referenda. The District Council, is here for the people, and if the community does not want to have GM Foods or wants to have a GM free area, then the District Council would change the plan to accomodate this.
Question 3 response:
I do feel I am repeating myself, but I must stress, even if I do not believe in GM foods, the whole community has to have the choice. This can be achieved by Binding Referenda.
|
|
| (1799 Reads) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Simon Valllings response.
No compromise for me on this issue, yes to all 3 questions.
I support a Regional Exclusion Zone for GMOs.
|
|
| (1954 Reads) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stan's response is Yes to all 3 questions.
|
|
| (2125 Reads) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This page was generated from a MySQL database using PostNuke, a web portal / CMS system written in PHP, and is Free Software released under the GNU/GPL license.
|
|
|
