31 January 2013

Organic milk is solution for DCD fears

It is time for Fonterra to revisit its decision to scale down organics, the Green Party said today.

In 2011 Fonterra made the decision to reduce its separate collection of organic milk, resulting in the loss of premium price for effected organic producers and the mixing of their milk in with the main supply.

“Many of the remaining organic farmers that supply Fonterra are anxiously waiting for their contracts to be renewed tomorrow,’ said Green Party agriculture spokesperson Steffan Browning.

“Now is the chance for Fonterra to prove its commitment to chemical free milk by renewing these contracts and committing to scale back up its organic supply,” said Mr Browning.

“Westland Dairy should also do the same after it announced that dicyandiamide (DCD) was found in its milk as well.

“Organic producers avoid using chemicals, the very chemicals such as DCD that have our international markets so worried.

“The damage to New Zealand’s reputation after chemical residues were found in milk can be built back through increasing organic production.

“I’ve visited these organic farmers, their animals are healthy, their rivers are clean, and they enjoy farming to produce high value product. That’s the future of farming in New Zealand.

"The back off from organics in 2011 was a huge disappointment to farmers and they are still on the edge of their seats waiting to see if Fonterra will make a new commitment to organics.

“Fonterra had said it was in organic farming for the long term. In 2010 it was planning to expand organics but dropped those suppliers at the first hurdle.

“It’s time for New Zealand dairy processors to look at the long term, and support the chemical free organic milk supply.

© Scoop Media

Arguably Reassuring: Inspector-General Finds GCSB "Arguably" Legal

Of the 88 individuals:

• 15 cases involving 22 individuals did not have any information intercepted by GCSB.

• another four cases involving five individuals were the subjects of a New Zealand Security Intelligence Service warrant and the GCSB assisted in the execution of the warrants. The Inspector-General is of the view that there were arguably no breaches and the law is unclear.

• the Bureau only provided technical assistance which did not involve interception of communications, involving three of the individuals, so no breach occurred.

• the remaining cases involved the collection of metadata, and the Inspector-General formed the view that there had arguably been no breach, noting once again that the law is unclear.
More>>