I would like to say that useful sources of information that can be used to form an opinion about these arrangements could be found in the previous independent reviews of the regulatory arrangements for gene technology here in Australia. Those reviews were conducted in 2005-06 and 2011. And those reviews of the Gene Technology Scheme are expected to be conducted every five years. The previous reviews that the scheme operated efficiently and effectively, and as to the question as whether the scheme is still appropriate and the arrangements are up to date, I would like to point out that the expected review of the scheme that is to kick off this year, provides an opportunity to examine those matters in detail, and also an opportunity for stakeholders to provide inputs into any examination of the operation of the scheme, including the interface with other regulatory agencies. I also understand that in this matter, the current, I believe the current review of the Code, that’s the agricultural veterinary legislation that relates to the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority, I believe has also examined this matter. So there are a couple of opportunities for the matter to be examined in detail. I’d like to go on to talk a little bit now about a matter that’s I believe raised in some submissions. It’s also a matter of course that’s often raised in relation to genetically modified organisms, and that is the safety of GMOs and the evidence that supports the safety of GMOs. The OGTR has a number of highly qualified and experienced scientific staff who are responsible for conducting risk analysis in-house for all applications that relate to GMOs for intentional release into the environment. Those scientific staff examine quite a range of information for each of the risk analysis that they conduct. The information that they use comes from information provided by applicants, as well as published literature, this is peer-reviewed published literature, both domestic and international published literature, as well as information that may be available from other sources, published sources such as books, fact notes, agricultural information, et cetera. The risk analysis that are conducted by the scientific staff are within the office. They’re also reviewed by an expert technical committee that provides advice to the regulator. They’re reviewed also by other government departments, other regulatory agencies, and there’s extensive public consultations on these risk analyses. So there are many opportunities for these to be reviewed and refined.
I would like to say that useful sources of information that can be used to form an opinion about these arrangements could be found in the previous independent reviews of the regulatory arrangements for gene technology here in Australia. Those reviews were conducted in 2005-06 and 2011. And those reviews of the Gene Technology Scheme are expected to be conducted every five years. The previous reviews that the scheme operated efficiently and effectively, and as to the question as whether the scheme is still appropriate and the arrangements are up to date, I would like to point out that the expected review of the scheme that is to kick off this year, provides an opportunity to examine those matters in detail, and also an opportunity for stakeholders to provide inputs into any examination of the operation of the scheme, including the interface with other regulatory agencies. I also understand that in this matter, the current, I believe the current review of the Code, that’s the agricultural veterinary legislation that relates to the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority, I believe has also examined this matter. So there are a couple of opportunities for the matter to be examined in detail. I’d like to go on to talk a little bit now about a matter that’s I believe raised in some submissions. It’s also a matter of course that’s often raised in relation to genetically modified organisms, and that is the safety of GMOs and the evidence that supports the safety of GMOs. The OGTR has a number of highly qualified and experienced scientific staff who are responsible for conducting risk analysis in-house for all applications that relate to GMOs for intentional release into the environment. Those scientific staff examine quite a range of information for each of the risk analysis that they conduct. The information that they use comes from information provided by applicants, as well as published literature, this is peer-reviewed published literature, both domestic and international published literature, as well as information that may be available from other sources, published sources such as books, fact notes, agricultural information, et cetera. The risk analysis that are conducted by the scientific staff are within the office. They’re also reviewed by an expert technical committee that provides advice to the regulator. They’re reviewed also by other government departments, other regulatory agencies, and there’s extensive public consultations on these risk analyses. So there are many opportunities for these to be reviewed and refined.