Government of South Australia "?tqt Primary Industries and Regions SA

Our ref: CORP F2019/000404 BUSINESS SERVICES, CORPORATE SERVICES Level 16 25 Grenfell Street Adelaide SA 5000 20September 2019 GPO Box 1671 Adelaide SA 5001 DX 667 Tel 8429 0422 Mr Peter Malinauskas MP www.pir.sa.gov.au Leader of the Opposition GPO Box 572 ADELAIDE SA 5001

Dear Mr Malinauskas

Determination under the Freedom of Information Act 1991

I refer to your application made under the Freedom of Information Act 1991 which was received by Primary Industries and Regions SA (PIRSA) on 19 August 2019, seeking access to the following:

"Copies of any and all documents (including but not limited to hard copy or electronic briefings, minutes, reports, text messages, emails, letters, and any other correspondence) relating to departmental advice provided to the Minister for Primary Industries and Regional Development about lifting Genetically Modified Food Crops Moratorium in South Australia." Time frame: 1/07/2018 to 19/08/2019

I apologise for the short delay in responding to your application.

Accordingly, the following determination has been finalised.

I have located sixteen documents that are captured within the scope of your request.

Determination

I have determined that access to the following documents is granted in full:

Doc -No Description of document No. o Pages Minute from Chief Executive, PIRSA to Minister for Primary 3 Industries and Regional Development dated 27/2/2019 re Independent Review of the South Australian GM Food Crop Moratorium Final Report - Public Release and Next Steps 1 a Attachment to Doc 1 - GM Review Findings Summary 2 lb Attachment to Doc 1 - Independent Review of South Australia's 2 Moratorium on the Cultivation of GM Food Crops - Options for Next Steps

Objective ID: A4149551 Page 1 of 5 2b Attachment to Doc 2 — Independent Review of South Australia's 2 Moratorium on the Cultivation of GM Food Crops — Options for Next Steps 2c Attachment to Doc 2 — Register of third group of GM Review 2 Final Report Consultation Submissions 5 Draft minute from Chief Executive, PIRSA to Minister for 2 Primary Industries and Regional Development re Consent to Instruct Parliamentary Counsel (SA) to remove GM Crop Moratorium across all parts of South Australia excluding Kangaroo Island 6a Attachment to Doc 6 — Government gazettal notice 3

Determination 2

I have determined that access to the following document is granted in part:

Doc No. Description of document No. of Pages Minute from Chief Executive, PIRSA to Minister for Primary 4 Industries and Regional Development dated 14/8/2019 re Proposed next steps re lifting of the GM Moratorium in South Australia (excluding Kangaroo Island)

The information removed from the above document is pursuant to Clause 1(1)(e) of Schedule 1 of the Freedom of Information Act which states:

"1 — Cabinet documents (1) A document is an exempt document — (e) if it contains matter the disclosure of which would disclose information concerning any deliberation or decision of Cabinet;"

The information removed would reveal detail of a matter considered in Cabinet.

Determination 3

I have determined that access to the following documents is granted in part:

Doc No Description of document No. of k. Pages Minute from Chief Executive, PIRSA to Minister for Primary 4 Industries and Regional Development dated 15/4/2019 re Submissions regarding the Final Report of the Independent Review of South Australia's Moratorium on the Cultivation of GM Food Crops — Final Summary and Next Steps 2a Attachment to Doc 2 — Independent Review of South Australia's 13 Moratorium on the Cultivation of GM Food Crops - Final Report Consultation Issues Summary

Objective ID: A4149551 Page 2 of 5 The information removed from the above documents is pursuant to Clause 6(1) of Schedule 1 of the Freedom of Information Act which states:

"6 - Documents affecting personal affairs (1) A document is an exempt document if it contains matter the disclosure of which would involve the unreasonable disclosure of information concerning the personal affairs of any person (living or dead)."

The information removed consists of the names of authors of submissions in response to the findings of the Final Report of the Independent Review of SA's Moratorium on the Cultivation of GM Food Crops. The authors did not provide consent to the publishing of their submissions on the PIRSA website.

Accordingly, it is considered that disclosure of the names of the authors would be an unreasonable intrusion into the privacy rights of the individuals concerned.

Determination 4

I have determined that access to the following document is granted in part:

Doc No. Description of document No. of 1 Pages Minute from A/Chief Executive, PIRSA to Minister for Primary 3 Industries and Regional Development dated 20/7/2019 re Next Steps following the independent review of the South Australian GM Crop Moratorium

The information removed from the above document is pursuant to Clause 10(1) of Schedule 1 of the Freedom of Information Act which states:

"10 — Documents subject to legal professional privilege (1) A document is an exempt document if it contains matter that would be privileged from production in legal proceedings on the ground of legal professional privilege."

The information removed refers to consultation between PIRSA and the Crown Solicitor's Office referring to advices given or to be given, and is considered legally privileged.

Determination 5

I have determined that access to the following document is refused:

Doc No. Description of document No. of i Pages Attachment to Doc 4 — Draft Cabinet Submission 7

Objective ID: A4149551 Page 3 of 5 Access to the above document is refused pursuant to Clause 1(1)(b) of Schedule 1 of the Freedom of Information Act which states:

"1 — Cabinet documents (1) A document is an exempt document — (b) if it is a preliminary draft of a document referred to in paragraph (a);"

The document consists of a preliminary draft of a proposed Cabinet Submission (whether or not it had been submitted to Cabinet).

Determination 6

I have determined that access to the following documents is refused:

Doc No t Description of document No. o i_ Page Minute from Chief Executive, PIRSA to Minister for Primary 3 Industries and Regional Development dated 8/8/2019 4b Attachment to Doc 4 — Speech Notes for Cabinet Submission 1 5a Attachment to Doc 5 — Speech Notes for Cabinet Submission 1 Access to the above documents is refused pursuant to Clause 1(1)(f) of Schedule 1 of the Freedom of Information Act which states:

"1— Cabinet documents (1) A document is an exempt document — (t) if it is a briefing paper specifically prepared for the use of a Minister in relation to a matter submitted, or proposed to be submitted to Cabinet."

Document 4 consists of a briefing minute specifically prepared for the use of the Minister in relation to a matter proposed for submission to Cabinet.

Documents 4b and 5a consist of draft speech notes prepared for the use of the Minister in Cabinet.

Determination 7

I have determined that access to the following document is refused:

' Doc No. Description of document No. of Pages 7 Email from E Anear (PIRSA) to S Price (Office of the Minister 5 for Primary Industries and Regional Development) dated 30/7/2019

Access to the above document is refused pursuant to Clause 10(1) of Schedule 1 of the Freedom of Information Act.

Objective ID: A4149551 Page 4 of 5 The document refers to consultation between PIRSA and the Crown Solicitor's Office referring to advices given or to be given, and is considered legally privileged.

If you are dissatisfied with this determination, you are entitled to exercise your right of review and appeal as outlined in the attached documentation, by completing the "Application for Review of Determination" and returning the completed form to:

Freedom of Information Principal Officer Primary Industries and Regions SA GPO Box 1671 ADELAIDE SA 5001

In accordance with the requirements of Premier and Cabinet Circular PC045, details of your application, and the documents to which you are given access, will be published in PIRSA's disclosure log. A copy of PC045 can be found at http://dpc.sa.gov.au/ data/assets/pdf file/0019/20818/P0045-Disclosure-Log- Policy.pdf

If you disagree with publication, please advise the undersigned in writing within fourteen calendar days from the date of this determination.

Should you require further information or clarification with respect to this matter, please contact Ms Lisa Farley, Freedom of Information and Privacy Officer on 8429 0422 or email [email protected].

Yours sincerely

Michelle Griffiths Accredited Freedom of Information Officer PRIMARY INDUSTRIES AND REGIONS SA

Objective ID: A4149551 Page 5 of 5 Doc 1

Govvomont of South MOWlo PrIrhury Inclusidore6gfteplons SiCNN MINISTER'S OPFICE Minute to Minister for, Primary Industries and Regional Develop ent 2 FEB 2019 Ref;' oA186236 RECEIVED For Approval/Action February, Critical Date GM Review Report was released on 20 Subject Independent Review of the South Australian GM Food Crop Moratorium Final Report — Public Release and Next Steps

Synopsis

The Final Report of the Independent Review of the South Australian GM Food Crop Moratorium by Professor Kym Anderson was provided to your office on 6 February 2019. You announced the release of this report on 20 February 2019, Options for the next steps in this review are provided with this briefing for your consideration,

Recommendations

That you: 1, Note e--0 ntents of this briefing and attachment

Hon Tim Whetstone MP Minister for Primary Industries and Regional Development / 7/2019

Ministerial Comments Background

O The Government committed to commission a high level independent expert review (the Review) of the moratorium on the cultivation of GM food crops within six months of forming government In March 2018, O Emeritus Professor Kym Anderson AC was engaged to undertake the Review. He delivered the completed Final Report — Independent Review or the South Australian GM Food Crop Moratorium (Final Report) to you on 6 February 2019, O You announced the publication of the Final Report on 20 February 2019. Discussion

O The Final Report provides background on the current regulatory environment, a summary of the issues raised in public submissions and assesses the economic Impacts of the moratorium, O The Final Report contains 19 findings (listed in Attachment A) and discusses the merits of three options considered to be available to South Australia today: O Maintain the moratorium until 2026 as currently legislated; O Partially de-restrict GM food crop production In the state; O Remove all restrictions, a PIRSA has summarised the potential options for the next steps In progressing this review provided In Attachment B, These options can be summarised as: A. No change 13. Remove moratorium except On Kangaroo island C, Allow GM Canola only In all of SA or with the exception of Kangaroo Island U. Remove moratorium on 1 September 2019 by repealing the Genetically Modified Crops Management Regulations (Postponement of Expiry) Act 2017 E. Remove Moratorium by revoking the Regulations F. Remove Moratorium by repealing the GM Crop Management Act 2004 G. Address transport issue without changing current legislation — Finding 4,6,

Consultation ▪ In releasing the Final Report, the Minister has announced that the Government will undertake targeted consultation and is seeking feedback from industry, farmers and community stakeholders by 6th March 2019, 'This has now been published on the PIRSA website, • Section 6 of the Act, which provides the power to establish the moratorium by regulation, Includes requirements for public consultation and consultation with the GM Crop Advisory Committee, This Includes a 6-week public consultation period and 1 public meeting and would apply to options 0 and C above.

Other Relevant Reviews South Australian Parliament Select Committee on Moratorium on the Cultivation of Genetically Modified Crops in South Australia • Established in August 2018: this select committee continues to hear evidence for this Inquiry and is due to report to Parliament on 3 July 2019.

Page 2 of 3 Western Australian Parliament Parliamentary Review on compensation for economic loss caused by contamination by GM material 0 Tabled in WA Parliament on 18 February 2019, The Standing Committee On Environment and Public) Affairs Report Mechanisms for compensation for economic loss to farmers In Western Australia caused bY contamination by genetically mod/fled material contained the following key findings: o There is no evidence to suggest that economic loss to farmers caused by contamination by genetically modified material is a widespread or systemic problem In Western Australia, o There Is minimal evidence of systemic contamination by genetically modified material In WA, • The full report Is available at http://www.Parliament,wa,gov,au/Parliament/commilnefANCurrentNameNew/6A7380 2840079D1E48267831003B03B2?OpenDooument

Management of key risks iv iv The PIRSA Communications Unit has prepared key messages and frequently asked questions through the usual media approval processes,

Attachments A. Consolidated list of findings from the Final Report I3, Independent Review of GM Moratorium - Options for Next Steps

HIEF XEcUTIVE Primary Industries and Regions SA ,2,7 2, /2010

CONTACT Jo Collins POSITION Executive Director DIVISION Agriculture, Food and Wine MOBILE and LANDLINE 8226 0336 / 0408 000 660 PREPARED EY Elena Anear

Page 3 of 3 Doc la

Attachment A— GM Review Findings Summary Finding 1,1: Farm productivity growth has contributed strongly to growth in Australia's farm output since the 1950s, and has outpaced productivity growth In other market sectors of the Australian economy by a considerable margin until recently.

Finding 1.2; Productivity growth has slowed In the past decade or so in Australia's farm sector relative to Its non-farm sectors and to farm sectors In countries that have fully embraced GM crop technologies such as the United States and Brazil,

Finding 2,1; There Is awareness and appreciation of South Australia's GM food crop moratorium by at least one foreign firm (In Japan) and by several food processing businesses operating in South Australia,

Finding 2,2: If GM food crop production were to be allowed in the rest of South Australia, Kangaroo Island would be able to preserve its unique Identity so as to retain access to Japan's high-priced market for GM-free grain provided the island remained a GM-free zone, Finding 2,3: The majority of submissions, Including those from organizations representing most of South Australia's farmers, favour the Immediate removal of South Australia's moratorium on GM crop production and transport.

Finding 2,4: Bringing South Australian legislation into line with other mainland states and the Commonwealth will benefit the state by attracting/retaining research dollars, scientists and post-graduate students in South Australia.

Finding 3.1; Data on canola exports from Australian states to the European Union do not support the view that South Australians enjoy better access in EU non-GM grain markets,

Finding 3,2; The only data provided in submissions on prices of grain In South Australia versus grain in neighbouring states suggest that since 2012 there has been no premium for grain from South Australian despite it being the only mainland state with a GM crop moratorium,

Finding 3,3; The experience of GM canola production and marketing in other mainland states over the past decade reveals that segregation and identity preservation protocols and practice codes can and do ensure the successful coexistence of GM and non-GM crops In Australia,

Finding 3,4; The persistence of a GM crop moratorium in South Australia, especially In the face of the removal of moratoria a decade ago In neighbouring states, has discouraged both public and private agricultural R&D Investments in this state.

Finding 3,5: The adoption of GM crops typically leads to less, not more, use of farm chemicals, and the risk of herbicide resistance in key weeds can be reduced by rotating between different GM crop varieties.

Finding 4,1: The cumulative cost to canola farmers of South Australia's GM crop moratorium is estimated to be up to $33 million over 2004-18, and will be at least another $5 million if the moratorium is kept until 2025 — and possibly much more if Omega 3 canola proves to be higher priced and more profitable than current Roundup Ready canola,

Finding 4,2: Gross revenue for the producers of GM canola seed would have been an estimated $5,4m higher during 2004-16 without the SA crop moratorium, and $3m higher during 2019-25 if the current technology access fee is unchanged — at least some of which would have been allocated to new crop R&D Investments In South Australia. Finding 4,3: The above findings ignore farmers' reduced weed control costs and increased yields for the crop that follows GM canola the next season (worth up to $0,9 million per year), but they also ignore possible additional segregation costs (up to $0,3 million per year) if the GM moratorium is dropped,

Finding 4,4: Additional farmer benefits from being allowed to grow GM crops, not Included in the above calculus, are (a) having more varieties to choose from to best suit specific environments and seasonal weather anomalies, (b) environmental and health benefits from reduced farm chemical applications, and (c) a likely boost to the value of farm land whose productivity and profitability is raised.

Finding 4,5: Removing the moratorium on the transport of GM crop products in South Australia would expand the demand for transport services and lead to more interstate shipments of canola. Finding 4,6: The benefits of allowing GM canola production in South Australia would be reduced by less than 2% if the GM moratorium were to be retained for Kangaroo Island,

Finding 4,7: The benefits of removing the state's GM moratorium may be far greater than Just those from canola as new GM varieties of other crops (and pasture grasses) of relevance to South Australia are developed and approved by the OG TR,

Finding 4,8: New crop breeding techniques such as gene editing offer further benefits to farmers, but some of the new varieties may be regulated as if they are GMOs and thus would be unavailable in South Australia while ever the state's GM moratorium remains, Doc lb Independent Review of South Australia's Moratorium on the Cultivation of GM Food Crops - Options for Next Steps Report Release

Option Actions A Publication of Final Report • Media release - complete Key developed consistent • messages to ensure communication to stakeholders - complete • Notice via email to all submitters that The report has been published — complete • Report published on PIRSA website - complete • Targeted consultation at Minister's discretion • Engage with stakeholders who respond to the Report

Response to Findings

• All options will require consideration of Cabinet requirements • Crown Solicitors advice may be required to progress options B to E Option Actions/Process

A. No change to current legislation • Moratorium remains unchanged until expiry of current regulations in 2025_ • Implement through public statement

B. Maintain moratorium on Kangaroo Island • Amend or Remake Genetically Modified Crops Management Regulations 2008 as advised by Parliamentary Counsel to only - as per Finding 2.2. allow GM food crops to be grown in South Australia other than Kangaroo Island. • Process: — Consultation requirement of section 5 of the Act would apply —6 week public consultation, 1 public meeting and consultation with the GM Crop Advisory Committee. — Cabinet approval — Consult with Parliamentary Counsel — New regulations tabled in Parliament and considered by Legislative Review Committee — Parliament may move a motion to disallow within 14 sitting days of regulations being tabled. — If motion proceeds amendmentto regulations would be debated by Parliament.

• The Genetic* Modified Crops Management Regulations (Postponement of Expiry) Act 20f 7 will not apply to any new regulations made under the GM Crop Management Act 2004.

(Note possible opposing views on Kangaroo Island indicated in PPSA submission) C. Allow GM canola only in SA or in all parts • Consider other jurisdiction approaches; in particular NSW where only GM canola and cotton are allowed. of Kangaroo Island. SA except • Amend or remake Genetically Modified Crops Management Regulations 2008 as advised by Parliamentary Counsel so that moratorium does not apply to GM canola An additional regulation could be made to exclude Kangaroo Island so that GM canola would continue to be prohibited on Kangaroo Island. * Would require case-by-case assessment of newly approved GM food crops and future amendments to regulations to allow any other GM food crops to be commercially grown in SA. • Current exemptions such for GM wheat and barley contained trials would remain in place. • Process as per option B. • The Genetical!), Modified Crops Management Regulations (Postponement of Expiry) Act 2017 will not apply to any new regulations made under the GM Crop Management Act 2004. . D. Remove moratorium on 1 September • Revoke 2017 Act which has the effect of extending the current regulations to 2025. 2019 by repealing Genetically Modified • This would result in the Subordinate Legislation Act applying to the regulations and therefore the original expiry date of Crops Management Regulations 1 September 2019 would take effect. (Postponement of Expiry) Act 2017 • Process. — Cabinet approval to draft a Bill — Introduction, debate and passage of Bill through Parliament

E. Remove Moratorium by repealing the • Revoke Regulations and retain head of power in the Act so that a moratorium could be introduced in the future if new Regulations GM food crops are approved by OGTR but require restriction for marketing purposes in SA. • Moratorium would end on the day the Regulations are revoked. This would be a date four months after the regulations which revoke the existing Regulations came into operation, on a day specified in the revoking regulations, or at an earlier date if the Minister is satisfied that is neceiRsary or appropriate. • Process — Cabinet approval — Consult with Parliamentary Counsel to draft revoking regulations — Revoking regulations tabled in Parliament and considered by Legislative Review Committee — Parliament may move a motion to disallow within 14 sitting days of regulations being tabled. — If motion proceeds amendment to regulations would be debated by Parliament

F. Remove Moratorium by repealing the Act • Repeal Act and Regulations through a repealing Act as has occurred in WA & ad. • This would result in no power retained to restrict GM food crops for marketing purposes unless a new Act is made. • Moratorium would end when the repealing Act is brought into operation or on a set date fixed by proclamation. • Process: — Cabinet approval to draft a Bill — II ru oduction, debate and passage of Bill through Parliament

G. Address transport issue without changing • Could be progressed in parallel with consideration of A — E current legislation — Finding 4.5. • Grant case by case exemptions for transit of GM food crop seed through SA. * Initiate discussion with GPSA regarding interested parties/potential applications. Doc 2b Independent Review of South Australia's Moratorium Cultivation on the of GM Food Crops - Options for Next Steps Report Release-

Option Actions A. Publication of Final Report Media • release - complete Key developed to consistent communication stakeholders • messages ensure to - complete Notice via email all submitters that • to the report has been published — complete • Report published on PIRSA website - complete • Targeted consultation at Minister's discretion • Engage with stakeholders who respond to the Report

Response to Findings

• All options will require consideration of Cabinet requirements • Crown Solicitors advice may be required to progress options B to E Option Actions/Process

A. No change to current legislation • Moratorium remains unchanged until expiry of current regulations in 2025. • Implement through public statement

B. Maintain moratorium on Kangaroo Island • Amend or Remake Genetically Modified Crops Management Regulations 2008 as advised by Parliamentary Counsel to only - as per Finding 2_2. allow GM food crops to be grown in South Australia other than Kangaroo Island. • Process: — Consultation requirement of section 5 of the Act would apply —6 week public consultation, 1 public meeting and consultation with the GM Crop Advisory Committee. — Cabinet approval — Consult with Parliamentary Counsel — New regulations tabled in Parliament and considered by Legislative Review Committee — Parliament may move a motion to disallow within 14 sitting days of regulations being tabled. — If motion proceeds amendment to regulations would be debated by Parliament.

• The Genetically Modified Crops Management Regulations (Postponement of Expiry) Act 2017 will not apply to any new regulations made under the GM Crop Management Act 2004.

(Note possible opposing views on Kangaroo Island indicated in PPSA submission) C. Allow GM canola only in SA or in all parts • Consider other jurisdiction approaches; in particular NSW where only GM canola and cotton are allowed. SA Island. of except Kangaroo • Amend or remake Genetically Modified Crops Management Regulations 2008 as advised by Parliamentary Counsel so that moratorium does not apply to GM canola. An additional regulation could be made to exclude Kangaroo Island so that GM canola would continue to be prohibited on Kangaroo Island. • Would require case-by-case assessment of newly approved GM food crops and future amendments to regulations to allow any other GM food crops to be commercially grown in SA. • Current exemptions such for GM wheat and barley contained trials would remain in place. • Process as per option B. • The Genetically Modified Crops Management Regulations (Postponement of Expiry) Act 2017 will not apply to any new regulations made under the GM Crop Management Act 2004.

D. Remove moratorium on 1 September • Revoke 2017 Act which has the effect of extending the current regulations to 2025. 2019 by repealing Genetically Modified • This would result in the Subordinate Legislation Act applying to the regulations and therefore the original expiry date of Crops Management Regulations 1 September 2019 would take effect. (Postponement of Expiry) 2017 Act • Process: Cabinet approval to draft a Bill . — — Introduction, debate and passage of Bill through Parliament.

E. Remove Moratorium by repealing the • Revoke Regulations and retain head of power in the Act so that a moratorium could be introduced in the future if new Regulations GM food crops are approved by OGTR but require restriction for marketing purposes in SA. • Moratorium would end on the day the Regulations are revoked. This would be a date four months after the regulations which revoke the existing Regulations came into operation, on a day specified in the revoking regulations, or at an earlier date if the Minister is satisfied that is necessary or appropriate. • Process — Cabinet approval — Consult with Parliamentary Counsel to draft revoking regulations — Revoking regulations tabled in Parliament and considered by Legislative Review Committee — Parliament may move a motion to disallow within 14 sitting days of regulations being tabled. — If motion proceeds amendment to regulations would be debated by Parliament

F. Remove Moratorium by repealing the Act • Repeal Act and Regulations through a repealing Act as has occurred in WA & Qld. • This would result in no power retained to restrict GM food crops for marketing purposes unless a new Act is made. • Moratorium would end when the repealing Act is brought into operation or on a set date fixed by proclamation. • Process: Bill — Cabinet approval to draft a — Introduction, debate and passage of Bill through Parliament.

G. Address transport issue without changing • Could be progressed in parallel with consideration of A — E. current legislation — Finding 4.5. • Grant case by case exemptions for transit of GM food crop seed through SA. • Initiate discussion with GPSA regarding interested parties/potential applications_ Doc 2c

Name Date Received Corresponding workflow Anthony White 12 March 2019 (via office of eA186558 CREGAN, Dan Member for Kavel -7 March 2019- GM o - - review — Member for Kaye', Dan LE I I ER Cregan MP)

Andrew Curds, CEO 8 March 2019 eA186552 9L026a CURTIS, o - - Andrew - CEO, Livestock SA - South Australian SA Livestock GM Moratorium - 08-03-2019 — Letter

Ian Butterworth, President 2 March 2019 eA186459 BUTTERWORTH, Ian o - - President, Consumers SA - South SA . Australian Consumers GM Moratorium - 02-03-2019 - AtSubmission GM Foods 3.19 Wayne Hawkins, Circle H 4 March 2019 eA186499 HAWKINS, Wayne o - - South Australian GM Moratorium - 04-03- Farms 2019- AtGM Moratorium Report Consultation Russell Zwar, Zwar Farms 5 March 2019 eA186506 ZWAR, Russell South Australian o - - GM Moratorium - 05-03-2019 - At GM review Shane Mills, CEO 1 March 2019 eA186454 MILLS, Shane CEO, Kangaroo o - - Island Pure Grain - South Kangaroo Island Pure Australian GM Moratorium - 01-03-2019 — Letter Grain

Dr John Paull, University of 7 March 2019 o eA186538 - 07-03-2019 - AtPau112019.SA.GIVI.MoratoriumReview Tasmania, School of Land and Food

Andrew Aitken, CEO 6 March 2019 o eA186525 - AITKEN, Andrew - CEO, Adelaide Hills Council - South Australian Adelaide Hills Council GM Moratorium - 06-03-2019 — Letter Caroline Rhodes, CEO March 2019 eA186577 8.3.2019 RHODES, Caroline 8 o - - - CEO - Grain Producers SA - Grain Producers SA Submission — LETTER 2019 eA186541 07-03-2019 Andrew VVeidemann, 7 March o - - AtSub March 2019 SA Report Review of GM Chairman Grain Producers Moratorium Australia - Heather Baldock, Karinya 6 March 2019 o eA186523 - 06-03-2019 - AtSubmission to GM Moratorium Independent Ag Review Mar 2019 Tim Marshall March 2019 eA186505 5 o - MARSHALL, Tim - South Australian GM Moratorium - 05-06-2019 —Att Susan Gaze 22 February 2019 eA186498 GAZE, Susan GM 0 - - South Australian Moratorium - SENT TO PIRSA Further correspondence 9 March 2019 eA186521 -JENKE, Paul Jenke, Area Safes 6 March 2019 0 Paul - GenTech Seeds Pty Ltd - South Australian GM Manager, GenTech Seeds Moratorium - SENT TO PIRSA Pty Ltd. 2019 eA186508 ACKLAND, Ham South Australian Ham Ackland 5 March 0 - - GM Moratorium - SENT TO PIRSA 2019 eA186518 Patricia Clark 6 March 0 - CLARK, Patricia - South Australian GM Moratorium - SENT TO PIRSA provided eA186542 MCLAREN, Michelle McLaren Not 0 - Michelle - South Australian GM Moratorium - SENT TO PIRSA

Jennifer Luesby Not provided 0 eA186520 - LUESBY, Jennifer- South Australian GM Moratorium - SENT TO PIRSA Doc 5

Government of South Australia Primary Industries and Regions SA

Minute to Minister for Primary Industries and Regional Development

Ref: A4125963

For Approval

Critical Date 12 August 2019 Cabinet will be requested to approve consultation over amended regulations on 19 August 2019,

Subject Consent to Instruct Parliamentary Counsel (SA) to remove GM Crop Moratorium across all parts of South Australia excluding Kangaroo Island.

Synopsis

PIRSA protocol prescribes that you must consent to any request that instructs the Office of Parliamentary Counsel, That Is consent to draft, amend, vary or revoke legislation. Your office requested that a Cabinet Submission be prepared to lift the GM Moratorium across all parts of South Australia excluding Kangaroo Island. It is intended when consulting around the new regulation that the South Australian community affected by the change are given an opportunity to view the exact wording of the draft regulation and then be invited to comment on such legislative changes. Recommendations

That you: 1, Give consideration to instructing the Office of Parliamentary Counsel South Australia to amend Genetically Modified Crops Management Regulations 2008. That is lift the GM Moratorium across all parts of South Australia excluding Kangaroo island.

APPROVED / NOT APPROVED

Hon Tim Whetstone MP Minister for Primary Industries and Regional Development / /2019

Ministerial Comment Background

• The Commonwealth's Gene Technology Act 2000 (Cth) establishes a national co-operative regulatory scheme for gene technology. Genetically modified organisms (including GM food crops) are regulated under a national cooperative regulatory scheme for Gene Technology. Under this scheme, human health and environmental impacts (including the safety of consuming GM foods) are regulated by the Commonwealth, The national scheme allows for State Governments to regulate GM crops only where there are risks to markets and trade as these issues are not addressed by the Commonwealth regulators.

• The SA Act is in place for this purpose, however its scope is limited to GM food crops only. The Regulations prescribe the whole of the state as an area where cultivation of GM food crops is prohibited. This has been referred to as the moratorium on growing GM food crops.

• The Government of South Australia committed to commission a high level independent expert review (the Review) of the Moratorium within six months of forming government in March 2018. The objectives of the Review were to assess the economic impacts on South Australia arising from the Moratorium: commencing from its inception until its current expiry in 2025.

• From the Review and your own consultation, you found there to be limited economic benefit in preserving the GM Moratorium. Further, industry had expressed concern that the moratorium stifled innovation and denied SA farmers the choice to access the latest agricultural technologies, The community feedback expressed value in retaining Kangaroo Island as GM free. The Act prescribes a strict process by which consultation must occur concerning the lifting of a GM moratorium across South Australia; excluding Kangaroo Island.

CHIEF EXECUTIVE Primary Industries and Regions SA / /2019 1 -• • •• CONTACT Elena Anear POSITION A/Executive Director DIVISION Agriculture, Food and Wine MOBILE and LANDLINE 8429 0696 / 0477 729 897 PREPARED BY Ben Timmis/Gerard Ferrao

Page 2 of 2 Doc 6a

PREPARED BY THE MINISTER Public Consultation and Invitation for Written Representations and Not/co of Public Meetings

Notice is hereby given that the Minister for Primary industries and. Regional Development, pursuant to Section 6 of Genetically Modified Crops Management Aot 2004 notifies the general pUblic of the following; 1. To consult over lifting the Genetically Modified Food Crop Moratorium In South Australia excluding Kangaroo Island, 2. To notify that public consultation will occur for six weeks from Monday 19 August 2019 and conclude at 500 pm on Monday 30 September 2019, 3. To invite written representations regarding this notification, such notifications should be marked attention to GM Secretariat Support, Primary industries and Regions SA (PIRSA), GOvernment of South Australia; and be received no later than 5:00 pm on Monday 30 September 2019, 4, To invite written representations by: a. Electronic Mall to PIRSA.GIVIReview©sa,gov.au b. Post to GPO Box 1671, Adelaide SA 5001, 5, To invite attendance at public meetings at the following locations: I. Adelaide; Kangaroo Island, 6, To note that further information and all details concerning public meeting dates, times and full addresses will be published at: https://www.pirisa.50y,au/gmreview

NI Date: \<•‘ 20 1"-i

Signed by: Minister 3012 THE SOUTH AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT GAZETTE 22 August 2019

11, In this exemption Specified Affiliates of SARDI means commercial fishing licence holders, Independent contractors, research students, volunteers, and ether affiliates proVided the following additional conditions are met: • The affiliates are at all limes in the presence of, and under the direm supervision, of an exemption holder while undertaking the exempted activity; • At least 1 clear business day (the'consIderation period") prior to undertaking the exempted activity the Research Director of SARDI Aquatic &knees (or his delegate) notifies the Exeoutive Director, Fisheries and Aquaculture (or his delegate) in writing of the names of the affiliates together with any other identifying Information about the affiliates that maY be spoil-wally required Item lime to tinie; • No objection is taken to the affiliates nominated by SAEDI during the consideration period (with any such objection being corinnunicated to the Research Director of SARDI Aquatic Sciences or his delegate during the consideration period), Por time purpose of this instrument the delegate of the Executive Director Fisheries and Aquaoulture is: Mr Lambertus L6pez Manger Legal and Legislative Programs Email: InnthertuseloyezAsa.uov.au This notice does not purport to override the provisions or operation of any other Act including but not limited to the ildelalde Dolphi» &nowt) 200S, Alarhie Parks. Act 2007 or the River &bray Act 2003, Dated; 15 August 2019 SEAN Swat Executive Dircotor Fisheries and Aquaoulture Delegate of the Minister for Primary industries and Regional Development

FISHERIES MANA.GEMENT (PRAWN FISHERIES) REGULATIONS 2017 Fishing ran for the West Coast Prawn Fisheil TAKE NOTE that pursuant to repletion 10 of the Fisheries Management (Prawn Fisheries) Regulation,s; 2017) the notice dated 26 March 2019 on page 986 of the South Australian Government Gazette on 04 April 2019 prohibiting fishing notivities In the West Coast Prawn Fishery is HEREBY varied such that It will not be unlawful for a person fishing pursuant to a West Coast Prawn Fishery licence to use prawn trawl nets in the areas specified In Schedule 1, during the period specified in Schedule 2, and under the cenditions specified In Schedule 3, Scornful 'Me waters of the West Coast Prawn Fishery. SCHBDULE 2 Conuneneing at sunset on 24 August 2019 and ending at sunrise on d September 2019. SctitioULE3 1. Each licence holder must ensure that a representative sample of catch (a 'bucket count') Is taken at lest 3 times per night during the fishing activity. 2, Each 'bucket count' sample must he accurately weighed to 7kg where possible and the total number of prawns contnined In time buokat must be recorded on time daily catch and effort return, 3, Fishing must cease if one of time renewing limits Is reached: a, A total of 14 nights offIshIng are completed b. The average °atoll per vessel, per night (for all 3 vessels) drops below 300 kg for two consecutive nights c, The average 'bucket count' for nti vessels exceeds 270 prawns per bucket on any single fishing night in the Corinna area d. The average 'bucket count' for pit vessels exceeds 240 prawns per bucket on any single fishing night in the Coffin Bay area a. Time average 'bucket come for all vessels exceeds 240 prawns per bucket on any single fishing night in the Venus Day area, f. Time average 'bucket count' for all vessels exceeds 270 prawns per bucket on any single fishing night in the Corvisart Day area. 4, The fleet must nominate a person to provide a daily update by telephone SMS message to the Prawn Fishery Manager on 0477 396 367, to report time average prawn enteli amid the average prawn 'bushel count' for all vessels operating In the fisheiy, 5. No fishing notivIty may be undertaken after time expiration of 30 minutes Mein the prescribed time of sunrise amid no fishing activity may be undertaken before Mc prescribed time of sunset for Adelaide (as published (mm the South Australian Government Gazette pursuant to the requirements alio Proof of Sunrise and Sunset AI 1923) during the period specified in Schedule 2. Dated; 19 August 2019 STSVE SHANKS Prawn Fisheries Manager Delegate of the Minister for Ninety Industries amid 'Regional Development

GENETICALLY MODIFIED CROPS MANAGEMENT ACT 2004 PROPARBD BY THU MtNISTalt Public Consultant», adinvilallonfi». Represtmialitms am! Notice orPtibite A:feelings Notice Is hereby given that the Minister for Primary Industries and Regional Development, pursuant to Section 5 of notifies the general public of the followIng: I. To consult over lining the Genetically Modified Food Crop Moratorium in South Australia excluding Kangaroo Island, 2, To notify that public) consultation will occur for six weeks from Monday 19 August 2019 and conclude at 5:00 pm on Mondo 30 September 2019. 3, To invite written representations regarding this noting:motion. Surd) notifientIons should be muked attention to GM Secretariat Support, Primly Industries mid Regions SA (PIRSA), Government or South Austialia; nnd be received no later Om 5:00 pin on Mondny 30 September 2019, 22 Mpg2019 THE SOUTH AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT GAZETTE 3013

4. To invite written representations by: BICOIIMIO Mall to PIRSA,0MRovicw(40.nov,nti b. Post to GPO Box 1671, Adelaide SA 5001, S. To Invite attendance at public meetings at the following locations: I. Adelaide; if, Kangaroo Island, 6, To note that Maar infonnation and all details concerning public: meeting dates, Macs and addresses will be published at : h fins:/Avww,nir,se.pov,att/am review Dated: 19 August 2019 HQH TIMOTIIY WJIRTSTONISMP Minister for Primary Industries and Regional Development

HOUSING IMPROVEMENT ACT 2016 Rent Control The Minister for nutnan Services Delegate in the exercise of the powets conferred by the Housing Improvement /let 2016, does hereby fix the maximum rental per week Which shall be payable subject to Section 55 of the Residential reinitiates Act 1995, I() respect of each house described in the fellowing table. The anuinnt shown In the said table shall come Into fhree on the date of tills publication in the Gentle, Rental Address of Premises Allotment- Dertlileate of Title Maximum Section Volume/Folio per week payable 54 Aslifield Road, Elizabeth SA 5112 Allotment 3 Piled Plan 20577 Hundred of Munno Para 0T5257/784 $0,00 Dated: 22 August 2019 CrtAl0 THOMPSON Acting Housing Regulator and Registrar Housing Safely Authority, SAHA Delegate of Minister for Human Services

HOUSING IMPROVEMENT ACT 2016 Rent Control Revocations Whereas the Minister for Human Services Delegate is satisfied that each of the houses described hereunder has ceased to be unsafe or Unsuitable for human habitation for the purposes of the Housing intinvvenient Act 2016, notice Is hereby given Mat, in exercise of the powers Conferred by the said Act, the Minister for Human Services Delegate does hereby revoke the said Rent Conh'ol in respect of each property.

Address Allotment Certificate of Tine of Premises Section Volume/Pelle 24 Donaldson Terrace, Whyalla SA 5600 Allotment 275 Town Plan 560501 Hundred Of Randall CTI209/145, CTS814/$91 19 Alton Amino, Tomos Park SA 5062 Allotment 13 Filed Platt 200 Huadred of Adelaide CT5785/653 7 Magor Rd, Port Pine SA 5540 Allotment Billed Plan 0139 Hundred of Phie CT4174/492 42 Matilda Street, Port Lincoln SA 5606 Allotment 76 Deposited Plan 1677 Hundred of Lincoln CT 5793/286 19A \Yokel:ant Street, Adelaide SA 5000 Allotment 484 Filed Plan 182136 Hundred of Adelaide Cr4100/805, CT5779/337 25 Marian Road, Paynelnun South SA 5070 Allotment 3 Filed Plan 100614 Hundred of Adelaide CT5153/849 Dated: 22 August 2019 CRAW TIIOMPSON Acting Housing Regulator and Registrar Houshig Safety Authority, SAHA Delegate of Minister for Human, Services

LAND ACQUISITION ACT 1969 SUCTION 16 Form 5—Notic.a qtAcquisilion IINellee of acquisfilen The Commissioner of Highways (the Authority), of 50 Minders Street, Adelaide SA 5000, acquires the followhig interests in the tollowing First: Comprising an unencumbered estate in fee simple in that piece or land being portion of Allotment 113 in Deposited Platt No 14721 comprised in Cortifieate of Title Volume 5843 Polio Ill, and being the whole of the land Identified as Allotment 103 in 13121242 lodged in the Lands Titles Office, Secondly; Comprising an estate in fee simple in that piece of land being portion of Allotment !PI In Deposited Plan .No 14721 comprised in Certificate of Title 'Volume 5612 Polio 58, subject to the casement(s) over time land marked "A" (voided by T 2859922, and being the whole of the land Identified as Allotment 102 in D121242 lodged In the Lands Titles Office, This notice is given under seollon 16 of the lune I Acquisitim Ael 1969, Doc 6

Goveronont of South Austroiln Ptrninry InduArias and •len

Minute to Minister for Primary Industries and Regional Developm

Ref: A4181669

For Noting and Approval -••• - 1 • . 1 •••- •-•• -•,--.• .-•_. - • - Critical Date 16 August 2019 — Instruction to Gazette must reoelved by this date so publioation may occur on 20 August 2019,

• I, • . I Subjeat PrOposed next steps follewing your Cabinet Submission to consult over the lifting of the GM Moratorium In South Australia (excluding kangaroo island). Synopsis

The Government committed to commission a high level Independent expert review (the Review) of South Australia's Moratorium on the.oultivation of Genetically Modified (GM) food crops within slx months of forming government, The Review and your subsequent consultation found there to be limited eoonomio benefit in preserving the Moratorium. You sought to implement the Review's findings and provide South Australian producers with the opportunity tp choose to grow GM food crops as part of their farming practice.

As there are some oanola producers on Kangaroo island (KI) that export to a specialised market in Japan based on KI's non.GM status ou believed it rudent to retain the moratorium on Ki at this time

The legislation prescribes a process you must undertake before the Governor may accept your recommendation to alter legislation around lifting the Genetically Modified rood Crop Moratorium,

Recommendations That you: 1. Note the Information provided in this minute, NOTED

2, Approve the proposed public meeting locations or recommend. alternative locations: Adelaide Zillgli:g/Ill' II g6 ;Kinggopte ••- ; - - Clare/Jamestown...... f3 / NOT APPROVED • ,• Poq.1_,Inopin/Olavo/pLimpilns NOT APPROVED Bordertown/Keith/Naracoorte , 74 / NOT APPROVED Loxton/Karoonda /, NOT APPROVED vvvvit414A/m10,41 /mop / Metvo vaD 3. Approve the Notice In Attachment A for publication in the SANi-r Government Gazette, APPROVED/NOT P14OVED A) (

"t:''''':

. „ I 4 •• II I,r I ...... v1,11 • Hon Tim Whetstone MP Minister for Primary Industries and Regional Development 1/ K / 2018

Ministerial Comments

Page 2 of 4 Background • The Genetically Modified Crops Management Act 2004 (SA GM Act) Is In place for marketing and trade ptirposes and through its regulations prohibits the cultivation of GM food crops in the whole of South Australia — referred to as the .moratorium on growing GM food crops, • A 'Cabinet Submission has been lodged to consult over the lifting of the Genetically Modified Moratoriums in South Australia excluding Kangaroo Island, • Statute prescribes the process which must be followed before you can Instruct the Governor to alter a Regulation under the SA GM Act S. • ectIon 5(1) under the SA GM Ad prescribes the necessary process to amend current regulations, Before the Minister makes any recommendation to the Goyemor to make wall regulations, he must fulfil the consultation provisions under section 5(2) and 6(3) of the SA GM Act which states: (3) The Minister must not make a reoorninendation under subsection (2) unless— (a) the Minister has undertaken a public consultation process that satisfies the following requirements: N the process must provide for public no floe to be given In relation to the proposal to reCommend the making of a regulation under subsection (1); and (II) the process must allow Interested persons to make representations In writing to the Minister over a period of at least 6 weeks specified In the no floe; and (ill) the process must provide for at least 1 public meeting to be held in an area to be affected by the proposal during the period specified In the notice; and (b) the Minister Is satisfied that the regulation should be made for marketing purposes, • Under these provisions, the Minister must demonatrate to the Governor that he consulted on a proposal to vary a regulation which amends the GM Regulations,

Discussion ,Published Notice • Pending Cabinet approval, a notice will appear on the PIRSA website after the Cabinet Meeting of 1 detailing: tile oonsultation.period;, public) rifeeting location / (fetes', times; service address ro written representations, A draft media release has already been prepared. and is being progressed by the PIRSA CommlinloatIons Unit through the usual media approval processes, • It is anticipated the Published Notice will appear In newspapers circulating generally throughout the state, • A notice will ale9 be published In the SA Government Gazette, A draft has been ProVided for your consideration at Attachment A,

Page 3 of 4 Written Representations O It Is proposed-that a six (6) week public notification period commenoing on Monday 19 August 2019 and concluding at 6:00 pm on Monday 30 September 2019, O The service address for written representations is provided below: GM Secretariat Support Primary industries and Regions SA (PIRSA) Government of South Australia. GPO Box 1671 Adelaide SA 6001 Email: [email protected]

Public Meetings Given this Issue affects growers of GM food crops across the State, It Is recommended that multiple public meetings occur. Suggested meeting locations for consideration include; O Adelaide; O Kangaroo island (Kingscote); O Mld North (Clare/Jamestown); O Lower Eyre Peninsula (Port Lincoln/Cleve/Cummins); O Upper Eyre Peninsula (Wudinna/Nlinnipa); O Limesto'ne Coast (Bordeitown/Keith/Nara000rte); and/or O Northern Mallee (Loxton/Karoonda). Managernent of key risks

• The PIRSA Communications Unit will prepare key messages and frequently asked questions through the usual media approval processes. Attachment

A. Draft Notice for Gazettal - Public Consultation and invitation for Written Representations and Notice of Public Meetings,

CHIEI EXECUTIVE. Primary industries and Regions SA /g/V/ 2019

CONTACT Elena Anear POSITION Acting Executive Director DIVISION Agriculture,. .Food and Wine MOBILE and LANDLINE 0477 729 897 and 8429 0598 PREPARED BY Gerard Ferrao and Ben Timmis

Page 4 of 4 Doc 2

Govornmorkt of South Australia Primly Industries onil Raglans SA

Minute to Minister for Primary Industries and Regional Development

Rat A8985686

For Noting and Approval

Critical Date Nil 1 Subleat Submissions regarding the Final Report of the Independent ReView of South Australia's Moratorium on the Cultivation (AGM Food Crops — Final Summary and Next Steps

Synopsis

Your office has received a total of.81 submissions following your call for feedback on the Final Report of the 'independent RevieW of South Austraila's Moratorium on the Cultivation of GM Food crops, by Professor Kym Anderson AC, A complete summary of the submissions and proposed next stops are provided for your consideration,

Recommendations

That 'you: 1, N970,4 ontents of this briefing and attachments, 140TED

(s,,t1;7;r:ss $s . s ...... s,,P., Hon Tim Whetstone MP Minister for Primary Industrics and Regional Development _2% i4—i201

Ministerial Comments Background

• South Australia's non-GM position Is given effect by the Genetically Modified Crops Management Aot 2004 (the Act) and reguletions. Through this legislation, the Moratorium on the cultivation of GM food crops (the Moratorium) Is currently In place until 2026. • The Government committed to commission a high level independent expert review (the Review) of the Moratorium within six months of forming government In March 2018, • Emeritus Professor Kym Anderson AO (the. Reviewer) was engaged to undertake the Review, He delivered the completed Final Report Independent Review of the South Australian GM Food Crop Moratorium (Final Report) to you on 6 February 2.019, • You announced the release of the Final Report on 20 February 2019, • In releasing the Final Report, you announced that the Government would undertake targeted consultation :and would welcome feedback from Industry, farmers and community stakeholders by 6 March 2019, This consultation period has now closed, notifloation of which has been published on the PIRSA website, • submissions on the findings of the Final Report have been provided by your office In 3 batches, All have now been received and were published on the PIRSA webslte on Friday 15 March 2019.

Discussion

• The submissions received as part of the Final Report consultation process raise various 'issues relating to the Report and the potential lifting of South Australia's current moratorium on the cultivation of GM food crops (the Moratorium), • A.comprehensive summary of issues raised In all submissions has been provided at Attachment A With a reference to relevant findings in the Final Report where applicable, • In summary: o 16 submissions explicitly or implicitly favour the retention of the Moratorium (seven of which raise their concerns with the Review process and/or analysis); o 11 s.ubmIssions explicitly or implicitly favourthe lifting of the Moratoriuml; and o five submissions provide a more nuanced position: • Support for the retention of the Moratorium on Kangaroo island only. for short period (8-4 years) after which a review process should occur; • support for the lifting of the Moratorium on the SAmalnland with Kangaroo Island growers to make their own decision on the Introduction of GM crops;

While GPSN argues strongly In support of the removal of the Moratorium, It does acknowledge targeted consultation with growers on Kangaroo Island Is needed In order to provide confidence to their existing commercial arrangements whilst not penalising the rest of the state, Page 2 of 4 • support for the retention of the Moratorium, but should the moratorium be lifted, the need for consultation with Adelaide Hills Council Area primary producers to determine whether it should be declared a GM free zone; * support for the retention of the Moratorium, but should It be removed, theretention of the Moratorium on Kangaroo island as a minimum; and impacts of GM mole on Omani° Honey Production • An Issue raised by constituent concerns the potential Impact of honey bees consuming GM canola nectar. • Atsushi Ishida, Chairman of Japan's Paisystem Cpnsumers Cooperative Union briefly stated inthelr initial submission to the Independent Review that they have exclusively bought Kangaroo Island honey thanks to the Moratorium. • The Final Report does briefly consider GM Impacts on organic honey production and contains the following statement (page 20): "A 2007 report on potential impciats.of GM canola production on organic farming In Australia concluded that, If GM canola tyas commercialised In Australia, the direct impacts on argot* canola production In Australia most likely would be negligible, the introduction of GM canola would have minimal Impact on the organic Ilyestock'Industry, and the Impact on organic honey production would be minimal (Anted and Mazur 2007)," • Further technical advice could be sought from the GM Technical Advisory Committee on such issues as honey bees consuming GM canola nectar if considered necessary, Next Steos • Following the publication of the Final Report, options for next steps for progressing the Review were prepared at eAl 88230, They are provided again at Attachment B for your reference, 6 The submissions provided tend to support removing the moratorium (Option D in Attachment B), retaining the moratorium only on Kangaroo Island, with a review In 3- 4 years (Option B), or retaining the moratorium (Option A), • YOU met with the GM Crops Advisory Committee (the Committee) on 19 March 2019, A briefing containing a summary of the discussion and a draft letter seeking the Committee's formal position on the Final Report's findings have been prepared and provided to your office (A3984704). This request would fulfil part of your statutory requirement to consult under section 6 of the Act should you seek to progress any changes under the Act, • While not explored by the Reviewlindings, options regarding maintaining the Moratorium on Kangaroo island only, could be applied to the Adelaide Hills Council Area (as per the reqqest of Andrew Aitken, CEO .Adelaide Hills Council) should a rationale for that exist, This would require careful consideration of the boundaries of • the zone and practicalities of segregation from any GM food crops through the supply chain, • It is noted that Grain Producers SA has informed you that there are opposing views on the potential Introduotlon of OM crops from Kangaroo island primary producers, and has recommended further consUltation should be undertaken on the Island, Page 3 of 4 Submission Responses

• Responses to the final 18 submissions (batch 3) have been prepared for your • oonsideration, A register of these submissions Is provided at Attaohment C. This includes a reference to their oarresponding•workflows that provide draft letters of response as requested by your office. Financial implications

• None

Attachments A, GM Review Final Report Consultation Issues summary 13, Irdependent Revtew of GM Moratorium Options for Next steps C, Register of third group of GM Review Final Report Consultation Submissions

cHigF EXECUTIVe Primary Industries and Regions SA /1/q/2019

ONTACT Jo Collins POSITION Executive Director •• ••••••41 • • • OP ••••••••••• ••• ..... ••• • •• •• It • 0..6 •• DIVISION Agriculture, Food and Wine _ MOBILE and LANOLINE 8226 MO/ 0408 000 660 PREPARED BY Ben TIMmIs

Page 4 of 4 Doc 2a

Independent Review of South Australia's Moratorium on the Cultivation of GM Food Crops Final Report Consultation Issues Summary

No. Name Position Issues Raised Relevant Report Findings/Sections summary: (where applicable) Submissions supporting the retention of the Moratorium(Total: 15 Submissions) _ Retain the • Concerns regarding corporate biotechnology interests • Finding 3.3 (issues of Moratorium • Issues regarding contamination of non-GM crops segregation and identity Concerns regarding the Reviewer's perceived pro-GM bias preservation) Concerns re: • Review • Concerns regarding human health and environmental impacts (out of scope) process/ content

Retain the • Moratorium should be maintained • Finding 3.2 (regarding price Moratorium • Asserts that non-GM producers attain premium prices premiums) • Concerns regarding human health and environmental impacts (out of scope)

3 raftWeRtg Retain the • Concerns regarding honey bees consuming GM canola nectar • Section 3.2 (discussion that Moratorium • Concerns regarding perceived secrecy regarding labelling GM produce introduction of GM canola would have a minimal impact on organic honey) 4 Retain the Asserts that • Findings 4.1 and 42(costs Moratorium of the moratorium) • The Final Report contains: Concerns re: - Many flawed assumptions (no further specifics provided) Review - Inflates the costs of not lifting the Moratorium process/ of the GM-free - Ignores compelling data in favour state remaining and the content rights of non-GM farmers food - Is a threat to the SA industry

•Retain 5 the • Discussion of the timing of Select Committee on Moratorium on the Cultivation of • Findings 2.1(awareness and Moratorium Genetically Modified Crops in SA appreciation of SA's GM No. Name Position Issues Raised Relevant Report Findings"Sections summary: (where applicable) Concerns re: • Provision of information from the Consumers Union of Japan regarding Japan's moratorium by at least one Review concern's towards GM technology and the perception that Australia intends to Japanese firm.) process/ deregulate new GM techniques content (Separate briefing provided— see eA186519) 6 '' , Retain the • Does not want GM production in SA , L Moratorium • Wants SA to remain permanently GM free 7 Retain the • Overseas markets are increasingly moving towards clean, green, organically grown • Finding 3.3 (issues of Moratorium produce segregation and identity • Refers to European and Japanese markets as anti-GM preservation) • SA has a point of difference as a non-GM state • Section 5.1. Market benefits • No turning back once GM crops are introduced of South Australia's moratorium on cultivating GM crops 8 Retain the • Concerns regarding human health and environmental impacts Out of scope Moratorium

Retain the 9 • Believes the review is skewed towards only one sector of the SA community - canola • Finding 3.3 (issues of Moratorium crop farmers segregation and identity If GM is introduced, other canola lose their choice since there is overwhelming preservation) Concerns re: • growers Review evidence that GE canola cannot be contained • Finding 3.5: The adoption of process/ • Asserts that the majority of community or consumer organisations did not support the GM crops typically leads to less, of farm content repeal of the Moratorium not more, use • Believes KI could not remain GM-Free if the SA mainland was to repeal the moratorium chemicals due to pollinators travelling from the mainland • Finding 2.2: If GM food crop • Asserts that Australian Centre for Plant Functional Genomics was closed due to a lack production were to be of viable benefits allowed in the rest of South Australia, Kangaroo Island • Asserts that contrary to the Review's findings, evidence world-wide to show the amount of synthetic chemical use has increased with GM crops, not decreased, particularly as would be able to preserve its weeds become more tolerant to the chemicals used unique identity No. Name Position Issues Raised Relevant Report Findings/Sections summary: (where applicable)

• The Review provides no evidence regarding likely boost to the value of farm land and • Finding 2.4: removal of raising profitability of the land. Difficult for farmers to return to organic farming once GM moratorium will benefit the is adopted state by attracting/retaining • There is a growing market for organic food and lifting the moratorium on GM crops research dollars, scientists would likely have an adverse effect on organic farmers, due to contamination from GM and post-graduate students crops in South Australia. • Submissions via a campaign template should be treated with equal validity • Finding 1.2- productivity • Concerns regarding human health and environmental impacts (out of scope) growth has slowed in the past decade or so in Australia's farm sector relative to its non-farm sectors and to farm sectors in countries that have fully embraced GM crop technologies

10 Retain the • Presents 14 alternative findings in response to the Review: • Section 3 (discussion of food Moratorium o The Independent Review is not independent The Reviewer is a GM advocate, the labelling) Report contains errors of fact and should be disregarded Finding 3.2 (regarding price Concerns re: • The majority (78%) of submissions supported retaining the existing SA GM Review o premiums) The the process/ Moratorium. Review reports contrary • Finding 3.3 (issues of Australian supermarkets do not stock GM-foods because they that content o are aware segregation and identity Australian consumers have rejected them preservation) SA enjoys clean, and image which is important for tourism, trade, o a green smart . Section 4.2— (Discussion of education migration. The GM Moratorium investment, and supports the image of WA segregation legal case clean and green and smart, and scrapping the GM Moratorium would undermine (Baxter vs Marsh)) that image and its economic benefits • Section 3.4 (discussion of Around the world, there is sentiment against GM food o strong consumer chemical usage, including o There is a price penalty for growing GM crops. The average price penalty for GM glyphosate) canola in WA is 7.2% o GM agriculture is concenticited in just three countries, USA, Brazil and Argentina. Australia is a very minor player o Segregation of GM and non-GM canola has failed in WA and overseas No. Name Position Issues Raised Relevant Report Findings/Sections summary: (where applicable) o GM Roundup Ready canola is glyphosate dependent Health risk of glyphosate means more health costs for SA o Contaminated beer and wine can have negative economic consequences and damage exports. Glyphosate lawsuits can be an economic drain on the SA economy o Around the world, there is strong consumer sentiment for organic food (and against GM food) 0 Aubb cilia is the world leader in organic agriculture and accounts for 51% of the world's certified organic hectares o Organic agriculture in Australia is growing at 22% per annum. To allow GM puts organics at risk o SA leads the country in organic agriculture (based on certified organic hectares). Allowing GM in SA would put organics at economic risk o There is no social licence for GM. The SA GM Moratorium is consistent with the clean and green and smart image of SA and warrants being maintained for its social, environmental, health, education, trade and economic benefits 11 •• Retain the • The Report was not peer-reviewed • Findings 4.1 and 4.2 (costs _ . Moratorium • The standard form of analysis should be a benefit cost analysis over at least a twenty of the moratorium) period incorporating of potential uncertainties and sensitivity analysis. Concerns re : year — a range Review This was not done, only very simplified economic analysis was conducted, with the only process/ sensitivity analysis done favouring only GM crops content • Finding 2.3, that "the majority of submissions, including those from organisations representing most of SA's farmers, favour the immediate removal of SA's moratorium on GM crop production and transport' is incorrect • The Reviewer uses a range of selective data to overestimate the net benefits of lifting the canola • The Report provides no evidence of any consideration of the impact on the organic industry, with only a couple of references to very old reports 12 Retain the • Decisions on GM must be sustainable, not just -financial Moratorium • Not enough is known about GM — current reasoning is not valid to justify introduction • Provision of Bahal teaching material regarding alternative agriculture approaches — smallholder farming No. Name Position Issues Raised Relevant Report Findings/Sections summary: (where applicable)

13 Retain the • Wishes to register a No vote for GM farming in SA Human health and environmental Moratorium • Supports a focus on organic food production impacts out of scope. • Concerns regarding human health and environmental impacts

titAitia,,;:r 14 Retain the • Non GM crops are a premium market • Finding 2.2: If GM food crop Moratorium • By only retaining Kangaroo island as a GM-Free zone, will leave this market vulnerable production were to be to premium losses, with GM cross contamination, allowed in the rest of South • GM crop spray creates soil sterility and superweeds Australia, Kangaroo Island • Weed resistance has led to increased and more toxic sprays would be able to preserve its • SA GM-free moratorium is world-renowned unique identity • Recommends maintaining the GM ban in SA • Finding 3.5: The adoption of GM crops typically leads to less, not more, use of farm chemicals • Finding 3.3 (issues of segregation and identity preservation)

15 Retain the • Does not wish to see the moratorium on GM crops removed in SA • Finding 3.3 (issues of Moratorium • SA's GM ban creates market access, GM contamination is areal danger for organic segregation and identity farmers preservation) Concerns re: Review • If a farmer converts to GM, they are 'locked in' with very little, if any, ability to go back to • Finding 3.5: The adoption of process/ non-GM or convert to organic GM crops typically leads to content • Discussion of US Bayer Monsanto court case re glyphosate. Concerns regarding less, not more, use of farm human health and environmental impacts (out of scope) chemicals • SA in a good position to continue to capitalise on its clean green image and the • Finding 2.2: If GM food crop possible banning of glyphosate production were to be allowed in the rest of South • KI would unlikely be able to be maintained as a GM free zone — e.g. strong winds Australia, Kangaroo Island • Asserts that GM crops need more chemicals, not less as per the Report would be able to its • Asserts that the costs to farmers associated with the moratorium are inflated estimates preserve unique identity — Reviewer is pro-GM • R&D has declined due to lack of government funding No. Name Position Issues Raised Relevant Report Findings/Sections summary: (where applicable)

* GM seed transit would mean GM canola roadside contamination • Finding 2.4: Removal of • Is alarmed by the number of experimental GM trials occurring in Australia and new moratorium will benefit the gene editing techniques state by attracting/retaining • Discussion of Canadian and Indian farmers being "locked inn to GM research dollars, scientists 'cop health and post-graduate students • Is a out" not to have reviewed and environmental impacts — have economic consequences in South Australia. • SA government needs to independently research the matters which the review has not covered - before they make a decision Submissions supporting the lifting of the Moratorium (Total: 11 Submissions)

16 Lift the • As a cropping farmer, would like to see the Moratorium lifted • Section 5.5 Economic costs Moratorium • Grass control is a major problem so would like to grow Roundup Ready Ganda (GM) and benefits of maintaining, modifying or removing the moratorium (discussion of - weed control costs) 1D 17 Lift the • Strongly supports the immediate repeal of the Moratorium, based on the facts Moratorium presented in the Review and negative impact on families and farming communities of the Moratorium. 18 Jamie Wilson Lift the • Supports the immediate removal of the Moratorium based upon the Review findings Moratorium • Removal of the moratorium will allow further research, a greater range of plant genetic capabilities, wider marketing -window for grains, and increases in farm profitability and sustainability 19 Lift the • Believes the vast majority of Eyre Peninsula growers support the use of GM crops in • Finding 2.2: If GM food crop Moratorium the region; particularly GM Canola for its on-farm benefits production were to be • Believes the finding to allow KI to remain GM free is feasible due to its geographic allowed in the rest of South isolation and current premium markets Australia, Kangaroo Island • Costs incurred through the Moratorium disallowing GM seed transit through SA are would be able to preserve its borne by growers Australia wide unique identity • Finding 4.5: Removing the moratorium on the transport of GM crop products in South Australia would No. Name Position Issues Raised Relevant Report Findings/Sections summary: (where applicable) expand the demand for transport services and lead to more interstate shipments of canola. 20 Lift the • Concurs with the major finding of the Review which indicates that the GM moratorium • Findings 4.1 and 42(costs Moratorium has cost SA grain growers at least $33 million since 2004 of the moratorium) • made a submission supporting the removal of the current moratorium. As • Finding 2.2: If GM food crop many broadacre farmers in SA run livestock as well as cropping, the moratorium needs production were to be to be lifted as soon as it can be legislated allowed in the rest of South • upports and is pleased with most of those findings that flow on from Australia, Kangaroo Island Finding 4.1 would be able to preserve its • Given finding 3.3 (re. artlin. successful co-existence of GM and non-GM crops in other unique identity mainland states) ',0-?;'-` sees no reason if the current moratorium is removed, for a moratorium to be imposed on Kangaroo Island or any other defined region of SA. Such a moratorium would conflict with Finding 3.3 that GM and non-GM crops can coexist _ 21 Lift the • Farms on the SANic border— finds the restrictions in SA frustrating, farmers should • Section 5.5 Economic costs Moratorium have the same freedom of choice as interstate and benefits of maintaining, • There are a multitude of benefits from GM crops — from current varieties and those in modifying or removing the development in future moratorium (discussion of • GM crops need Less chemicals weed control costs) • Improved weed management is the critical decision making factor for growing GM • Finding 3.5: The adoption of canola GM crops typically leads to less, not more, use of farm chemicals • Section 5.4 Potential GM innovations likely to be available for commercial adoption by 2025

22 Russell Zwar, Lift the • A sixth generation grain grower in SA, crops produced include Canola, wheat, barley, • Section 5.4 Potential GM Zwar Farms Moratorium faba beans, oaten hay and lucerne seed innovations likely to be No. Name Position Issues Raised Relevant Report Findings/Sections summary: (where applicable) • Finds it frustrating that farmers in other states of Australia have access to more available for commercial varieties, different weed control options and potential new traits when choosing canola adoption by 2025 varieties. They successfully grow both GM and non-GM canola on the same property and alongside neighboring farmers with no issues of cross contamination and receiving virtually the same price as SA • Current extension of the GM moratorium until 2025 leaves SA growers way behind other states of Australia not just for current GM crops that are available but also new and exciting opportunities in development - e.g. GM shatter tolerant canola currently being tested which could prevent loss of seed from wind events, and GO Resources set to soon release a GM Safflower to market • The market will decide if there are premium prices for non GM products and then growers should choose which markets meet their needs 23 Caroline Rhodes, Lift the • GPSA welcome the findings of the Review • Itemised response by finding CEO Grain Moratorium • Re: Report Finding 1.1 — agrees - noting that field crops accounted for 28% ($4.16b) of — see Issues Raised. Producers SA the 2017-18 primary industries and agribusiness revenue in SA. SA fails to capture any value from the increased Australian export market of canola • Re: Report Finding 12- believes that SA farmers should be provided with the same ability to choose innovations to ensure that they remain sustainable and internationally competitive • Re: Report Finding 2_1 - only aware of one international -firm having made a grain purchasing decision as a result of SA's moratorium Australia's robust supply chain guarantees thatthe removal of the moratorium will not affect SA's ability to export GM- free produce • Re: Report Finding 2_2 — the Report highlights the ability of the grain supply chain to effectively manage segregations and the coexistence of GM and non-GM crops • Re: Report Finding 2.3 —the Moratorium has caused a loss of reputation, loss of competitiveness, increased cost to business, disapproval, loss of research investment • Re: Report Finding 2.4 - a lack of a clear pathway to market has hindered research and made it difficult to attract and retain students and academics in agricultural research. The credibility and integrity of the National Gene Technology Scheme's governance structure is undermined by SA's moratorium. SA legislation extends beyond 'marketing No. Name Position Issues Raised Relevant Report Findings/Sections summary: (where applicable) purposes' by placing restrictions on the transportation of GM materials within and through SA • Re: Report Finding 3.1 - exports to Belgium, France and Germany have substantially increased in recent years supporting the statement in the Review that segregation and identity preservation are sufficiently robust that the EU does not discriminate between Australian states in sourcing non-GM canola • Re: Report Finding 3.2- reiterates the findings from Review as well as several independent studies that conclude the moratorium does not offer a competitive advantage nor a price premium to SA agriculture • Re: Report Finding 3.3 —argues Australian industry has demonstrated successful coexistence over the past decade and therefore presents no barrier to the rapid introduction of GM crops in SA, providing that those same protocols can be implemented within SA • Re: Report Finding 3.4- contends that the moratorium is at odds with the governments commitment to regional SA and contradicts the governments own commitment to making SA an attractive and competitive place to do business • Re: Report Finding 3.5- agrees with the finding that there is great deal of evidence that the adoption of GM herbicide tolerant crops has had a beneficial impact on the environment. GM herbicide tolerant crops enable the use of less toxic and more environmentally-friendly chemicals • Re: Report Findings 4.1 and 4.2- The $33 million cumulative cost estimate over 2004- 18 is conservative and should be considered in the context of the small canola crop in SA_ The estimate does not consider any indirect benefits • Re: Report Findings 4.3 and 4.4- SA is not capturing any of the additional value gained while Australia's canals market has grown and agrees there are unlikely to be additional segregation costs should the SA moratorium be removed. SA grain receivals already undertake extensive seed quality testing for the presence of GM • Re: Report Finding 4.5 - supports this finding. Removing the moratorium would expand the demand for transport services and lead to more interstate shipments of canola, and notes that the ban does not just affect canola but also other GM products undergoing research and development No. Name Position Issues Raised Relevant Report Findings/Sections summary: (where applicable) • Re: Report Finding 4_6 —has outlined that the grains industry has a long history of implementing processes and systems that ensure the coexistence of various commodities throughout the supply chain. GPSA notes that KI Pure Grain's Japanese buyer currently also imports non-GM canola from other Australian states, which also grow GM varieties. Targeted consultation with growers on Kangaroo Island is needed in order to provide confidence to their existing commercial arrangements whilst not penalising the rest of the state • Re: Report Finding 4.7- urges the Government to provide all SA farmers the opportunity and choice to access the latest and best technologies applicable to their industries • Re: Report Finding 4.8 - As regulation is reviewed and shaped to be fit for purpose, SA industries and the broader public will remain disadvantaged if a lack of national consistency in legislation is maintained - 24 Andrew Lift the • Congratulates the Reviewer on a well-written and comprehensive report • Finding 4.5: Removing the Weidemann, Moratorium • GPA strongly supports the findings of the Report. In particular they are pleased at the moratorium on the transport Chairman Grain clear evidence that has been used to support the findings in support of the achievability of GM crop products in Producers of coexistence and the lack of substantive premium or market access advantage from South Australia would Ausli dlia continuing the moratorium expand the demand for • GPA strongly supports the submissions by Grain Producers SA for removal of the transport services and lead moratorium and immediate exemption for the transport of GM seed through SA to more interstate shipments • The urgency of seed movements to support their fellow WA grain producers access of canola. canola seed at a reduced cost should be a priority 25 Lift the • Supports the findings of the Final Report— a focus on science and facts rather than • Finding 2.4: removal of Moratorium emotion and ideology moratorium will benefit the • Hopes the moratorium wiii be lifted so SA farmers have a choice about what they can state by allidctingketaining grow on their own properties, and the state-of-the-art research facilities at Waite can be research dollars, scientists utilised and its work boosted with funding into GM traits in food crops and post-graduate students in South Australia.

26 Lift the * As a dryland farmer - when the Moratorium was -first introduced, although in favour of • Section 5.5 Economic costs Moratorium GM Technology, was personally in favour of holding back, while we waited to be sure of and benefits of maintaining, no major negative outcomes modifying or removing the No. Name Position Issues Raised Relevant Report Findings/Sections summary: (where applicable) • In the intervening 16 years, no negative outcomes have come-to fruition moratorium (discussion of • Continuation of moratorium has been emotionally and politically based weed control costs) • SA farmers have been held to ransom and denied access to the best technologies • Finding 3.5: The adoption of • GM crops reduce chemical useage, price premiums are fictional except for a very GM crops typically leads to specific example— Kangaroo Island less, not more, use of farm chemicals • Would acceptthe maintenance of the Moratorium on I

Government of south AustralIn Primary Industries and Regions SA

Minute to Minister for Primary Industries and Regional Dove100

Ref: eA187641 , For Noting

Critical Date Nil ..--•-_-•.•• Subject Next Steps following the independent revIWflhe South Australian GM Crop Moratorium

Synopsis

Following the Independent Review of the South Australian GM Crop Moratorium, you received severiliglis for consideration, to inform your next steps (eA186236), You have, In considering from this briefing, raised two • uestIons about whIc advice has been sought from the Crown Solicitor's Office (CS0),

cS0 advice has been sought and used to prepare this briefing,

Recommendations

That you: 1. Not pi-formation provided in this minute NOTE' .

Hon Tim Whetstone MP Minister for Primary Industries and Regional Development / /2019

Ministerial Comments Background

• The Government committed to commission a high level Independent expert review (the Review) of the moratorium on the cultivation of GM food crops within six months of forming government in March 2018. • Professor Emeritus Kym Anderson AC was engaged to undertake the Review, He delivered the Final Report — Independent Review of the South Australian GM Food Crop Moratorium (Final Report) to you on 6 February 2019. You announced Its publication on 20 February 2019. • The Final Report contained 19 findings. PIRSA summarised the potential options for the next steps In progressing the review and made them available to you under briefing eA186236,

•

Discussion

Page 2 of 3 • -

r'• - • • 't

Th

A/CHIEF EXECUTIVE Primary industries and Regions SA 20/7/2019

CONTACT Jo Collins POSITION Executive Direotor - • _ _ . . . DIVISION Agrloulture, Food and WIna _ _ . MOBILE and LANDLINE 8226 0386 / 0408 000 660 . . _ PREPARED BY Elena Anear

Page 8018