During the next 12 months New Zealand will consider the future of its biology based economy and the infrastructure which supports it.

The Royal Commission will focus attention on the direction of science, agriculture, international trade, health, and food as it is affected by biotechnology and gene technology.

The political decisions which will be made following the Royal Commission will crucially affect our ability to adapt to changes in our international markets and our ability to utilise the knowledge base of our science industry for our future wealth.

The New Zealand Life Sciences Network (Inc) will develop a cohesive, comprehensive and coordinated approach to the issues and problems which lie ahead.

The Network will undertake three strands of activity; public education, media education and political education about GE and GMOs and the role of biotechnology, using the Royal Commission of Inquiry as a catalyst or fulcrum for the wider activity.

The Network is seeking an outcome from the Royal Commission which will give the Government the necessary level of comfort to continue to promote and invest in the current biological science construct including research, development and application of biotechnology including GMOs.

The Network will become a party to the Inquiry. Therefore the Network will be a constant presence at the formal proceedings of the Royal Commission.

The Network will provide coordination of member's interactions and development of a comprehensive case which addresses all aspects of the debate from the member's viewpoint.

Members will present their own submissions on matters of detail and evidence. The Network will present submissions which summarise and draw together individual members submissions.

Desired outcome of campaign

Desired outcome must be that the NZ public is confident:

• gene technology research and development is conducted in a safe manner, and
  
• appropriate, transparent controls are in place to ensure gene technology research is applied so that risks are outweighed by benefits, and
  
• the science community is accountable and takes responsibility for maintaining a high degree of public comfort in scientific development
  

Background to the issue

The Government's Royal Commission of Inquiry into Genetic Modification has the potential to dramatically alter the fundamental basis of the New Zealand economy and therefore will impact on every organisation which has invested time, money and resource into the development of the biological basis of our wealth.

The future wealth of New Zealand and New Zealander's is dependent on the course which the Government takes as a result of the deliberations of the Royal Commission. We are being asked to choose a path.

We want a future where we can continue to develop sound science-based solutions to maintain the widest possible range of options including organics.

The potential damage to the New Zealand economy is huge if, as a result of public and political consideration of the GM issue, New Zealand's ability to maintain its science and innovation capacity, and to argue for trade access for our products based on sound science, is undermined.

In addition, the imposition of new regulations and compliance requirements (which will follow a decision to limit the use of GMOs) is a cost which has not been recognised.

This situation has arisen because anti-gene technology activists in the northern hemisphere have been successful in developing a global campaign based on instilling fear in consumers based, in part, on misrepresentation of the risks associated with gene technology and the use of pseudo-science to undermine public confidence in science.

New Zealand is an important link in the chain because it represents an opportunity for the global anti-gene technology movement to gain momentum in the Pacific and Australia with the eventual objective of changing attitudes in the US.

It is important to recognise the Royal Commission of Inquiry into Genetic Modification is a phase in a process.

Politicians will make the critical decisions when the Royal Commission has reported on the basis of public confidence in science and scientists. Therefore, Network activity must encompass three underlying strands; media relations, public relations and government relations. These activities must continue throughout and after the Royal Commission of Inquiry

NZLSN campaign strategy

For the New Zealand Life Sciences Network (Inc) to:

• Build public, and therefore political confidence in gene technology, science and scientists through information, education and knowledge
  
• Coordinate the activities of member organisations and network participants to ensure the public, media, politicians and Royal Commission are presented with the most complete case in favour of continued responsible research, development and application of gene technology in New Zealand.
  
• Work with non-member organisations to seek to achieve its desired campaign outcome
  

Implications of strategy

• While the strategically important campaigns run outside, the Royal Commission is the focal point from which other activity can be leveraged
  
• The totality of submissions and evidence to the Royal Commission of Inquiry into Genetic Modification by the Network and its members should constitute a shadow Royal Commission report and recommendations
  
• Fully engage with Royal Commission to ensure a complete case is presented and heard
  
• Every misrepresentation or erroneous accusation made by the organisations of anti-GMO (i.e. Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth, Green Party) should be challenged and rebutted
  
• Fears expressed by ordinary New Zealanders should be listened to and acknowledged
  
• The focus of all communications, messages, submissions, evidence should be to establish the truth of the assertions as stated in our desired outcomes.
  
• Expert witnesses from New Zealand and overseas should be available for media interviews; public meetings and other opportunities to build public confidence through information, education and knowledge
  
• All opportunities for positive media coverage of the submissions and evidence of the Network, its members and witnesses should be taken
  
• Scientists must be prepared to stand up to re-build public trust in their science and themselves
  
• Scientists must be prepared to engage and win over, through logical debate, church leaders because they are still perceived to be the arbiters of ethical standards