Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) has approved updated definitions for genetically modified (GM) food in the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code.
Following an extensive review under Proposal P1055 – Definitions for gene technology and new breeding techniques, the GM definitions have been modernised to address advances in gene technologies and maintain strong food safety protections.
FSANZ CEO Dr Sandra Cuthbert says the new definitions reflect the latest science and will provide greater clarity for industry, regulators and consumers.
“The updated definitions are outcome-based, focusing on the change that has been made rather than the process used to make the change,” she says.
“Our safety assessment confirms that many modifications achieved through new breeding techniques are equivalent to those from conventional breeding, which is widely recognised as safe.”
The new definitions are said to be designed to remove ambiguity and improve clarity and predictability while continuing to protect public health and safety. These definitions will apply across the Code, supporting consistent GM food assessment and labelling and ensuring regulatory oversight remains proportionate to risk.
Existing requirements for pre-market safety assessment and labelling of GM foods will continue to apply.
The approval now moves to Australian and New Zealand food ministers, who have 60 days to consider FSANZ’s decision.
Organic industry responds
The Australian organic industry is calling on state and federal Food Ministers to reject FSANZ’s proposal, warning that the plan would strip consumers of their right to know whether the food they eat has been GM or gene-edited.
“Traceability without transparency is a dangerous illusion,” says Australian Organic Limited Operations and Technical Manager Josefine Pettersson.
“Organic supply chains will be expected to test all ingredients to verify freedom from undeclared gene-editing technologies – but there will be no obligation for manufacturers or importers to declare when these processes were used.”
The organic industry supports advances in testing technology, but Ms Pettersson notes this isn’t enough.
“The reality is: without disclosure of which edits have been made and where in the genome, it may be impossible to detect changes for processed products,” she says.
“This puts certified supply chains in an impossible position. Worse still, if an undeclared gene-editing change is detected by someone else, such as an export partner or foreign lab, it would fall on us to prove it wasn’t caused by gene technology”.
The organic sector is urging Ministers to pause the proposal and commission a full review that includes:
- The cost to compliance systems and certification bodies
- The impact on consumer trust and informed choice
- The effect on Australia’s export relationships and equivalency recognition
