Dr Jack Heinemann. Rova NZ

New Zealand’s Organic and Biodynamic Winegrowing Conference returned in June 2025 and although several intense topics were presented across the three days with several calls to action, one of the most urgent warnings was from Dr Jack Heinemann, PhD, FHEA, Professor of Te Whare Wānanga o Waitaha, University of Canterbury, School of Biological Sciences.

American-born, Dr Heinemann has a long career as a genetic engineer and expert in biosafety. He delivered his presentation via remote video, in which he discussed the worrying misinformation being pushed regarding the controversial Gene Technology Bill which is currently before the Health Select Committee (public submissions closed in February of this year).

According to Dr Heinemann, support for the bill is really only coming from one small part of the scientific community which is at odds with the generally accepted science. Disentangling the rhetoric and fictions which provide the need for such the bill introduced by Judith Collins, Dr Heinemann makes it clear that despite claims to the contrary, there is currently no ban on gene technology. The only legal requirement is simply that it is regulated and therefore must be conducted in a registered containment facility.

The new bill allows genetic research to occur without regulation, outside of contained facilities without the need for risk verification. The use is currently restricted to trained personnel, whereas the new bill allows anyone to do this without formal training. It also removes liability, thereby protecting those who practise it from being pursued by the law, so riskier activities can be encouraged. In short, the Gene Technology Bill is deregulation with no traceability, no recall, and no liability.

In an interview earlier this year with Radio New Zealand, Dr Heinemann told Amanda Gillies:

“This legislation would take chemical components, that happen to be biological molecules, that are also very potent mutagens, and allow people to use them anywhere without any kind of oversight. When we have done those kinds of operations historically, we have at least required that they be done inside a registered containment facility, so we can control who is using them, who is exposed to them and what happens to the things that we didn’t want exposed or to the things that were changed in ways that we didn’t want them to be changed in, and make sure that those don’t escape the laboratory and get into the environment. This is the departure point for the bill as proposed… for some of the most important, easily obtained and powerful of the techniques we have available right now.”

In an earlier opinion piece on The Spinoff last year, Dr Heinemann addressed the attempt by certain companies who stand to benefit from this change in the law to redefine genetic modification by arguing that genetic editing is not the same thing and should not be considered genetic modification. According to definitions, including those used by the US FDA, this is simply not true. Dr Heinemann stated in his piece that:

“Suggesting that GMOs are only organisms with added DNA lures the Government into thinking there is a class of ‘low-risk gene-editing activities’ when they’re not used to add DNA, and these ‘can be exempted from regulations’.”

“Even if that were true, it may be impossible to avoid adding DNA when using gene editing. Gene-editing techniques have been used to make GMOs since the 1970s. What has changed is developments in gene editing that increase the efficiency of making desired DNA changes. The new tools make GMOs faster. Gene-editing techniques accelerate the rate of genetic change, but not safety. There is no limit to the variation that can be introduced through gene editing.”

The other fiction which Dr Heinemann called out was the claim that the rest of the world has moved on and New Zealand is falling behind. Of all our main trading partners, only Canada and Australia have amended their exclusions. More tellingly, Canada only allows it in plants while Australia clearly distinguishes between technologies, namely SDN-1, SDN-2 and SDN-3 which roughly correspond to increasing risk.

He continued to explain that SDN-3 is the only technique which is noted as potentially high risk in theory but the risks in practice apply to all the techniques. Of the three, only SDN-1 is deregulated in Australia, while in China it is only allowed in plants. The USA does not allow even SDN-1. Therefore, despite assertions from the supporters of the bill, there is actually no alignment with our main trading partners. In fact, New Zealand’s status as a GMO-free producer (which exists despite genetic engineering research currently being permitted in New Zealand) is of great value to our exporters.

As an example of real-life experience versus theoretical risk, even SDN-1 reactions using CRISPR in potatoes resulted in unintended inclusion of other DNA. These transgenic insertions happen because sources are impure and tools can be contaminated. The requirement to practise genetic editing in a contained facility and tighter regulation helps to screen these impure insertions out of the stream before they are released into the environment. This confirmation step is key to safe practice of gene technology.

To be clear, things are changing in the field and regulations need to be updated to keep pace with these changes. The argument Dr Heinemann is making is that change does not necessarily have to mean deregulation. The burden of proof to maintain New Zealand’s GMO-free status as an exporter is going to be onerous if it is even possible, once gene-edited organisms are freely spreading through the environment. The slightest contamination would affect our produce when it is screened or tested at destination markets. This of course, is of great concern to our wine industry, especially our organic producers. As always with these highly political things, one has to ask “Who is behind these changes and who stands to benefit”?

You can listen to Dr Heinemann explain more about the bill on this podcast. His presentation will also be available on the Organic Winegrowers New Zealand website.