The New Zealand government is ending a nearly 30-year ban on using gene technology outside the laboratory – a decision that could have potential ramifications in Scotland.

Legislation, based on Australia’s Gene Technology Act 2000, will be introduced by the end of this year ending the ban and implementing a dedicated regulator to oversee applications to use gene technology.

Science, innovation and technology minister Judith Collins described the move as modernising gene technology laws, which will benefit health, climate change adaption and deliver economic gains and improve the lives of New Zealanders.

MORE NEWS | UK agricultural course applications rise 20%

MORE NEWS | Bluetongue virus outbreak across Europe

“These changes will bring NZ up to global best practice and ensure we can capitalise on the benefits,” Collins said.

Gene technology has been used to develop several high-performing pasture cultivars that in lab trials were shown to be drought tolerant, productive and reduce methane emissions by around 15%.

But the law as it now stands has made it prohibitive to conduct field trials, which the science company had to run in the United States and Australia.

The policy change was part of the coalition government’s agreement and Dr Parmjeet Parmar, ACT’s science, innovation and technology spokesperson, said it brings NZ into the 21st century.

“The delivery of this coalition commitment means our brightest scientific minds will be freer to make advancements that will lift human flourishing, improve environmental outcomes, and create major commercial opportunities.

“Current restrictions on gene technology have led to absurd outcomes.

“In one case local scientists developed a red-fleshed apple but weren’t allowed to taste test that apple in NZ. They had to taste it in the US instead.” BioTechNZ executive director Dr Zahra Champion said the government’s decision will boost gene technology industries while ensuring protection for human health and the environment.

“Current regulations for genetic technologies are outdated and not fit for purpose.

“For years they have been hampering companies and researchers from keeping pace with scientific advancements and have been stifling innovation.”

She said it will enable gene technology to assist confronting challenges in agriculture, healthcare, and environmental sustainability. AgResearch science team leader Richard Scott welcomed the move, saying: “The approach proposed for NZ, which excludes ‘low-risk and well-understood gene technologies’ from regulation, is sensible.

“We know that certain changes made by gene editing, for example, are virtually indistinguishable from changes that can occur naturally or through conventional breeding of organisms.”

Establishing a gene technology regulator similar to Australia’s Office of the Gene Technology Regulator will ensure the health of people and the environment, he said. Closer to home, a Scottish Government spokesperson said: “We are aware of the current debate around new genomic techniques and how these relate to existing genetic modification legislation, which is a devolved area of responsibility.

“We want to ensure that Scotland operates to the highest environmental standards, and that we protect the strengths of Scottish agriculture and food production.

“Any future decision taken on new genetic technologies such as gene editing will be informed by the views of industry, scientists as well as the general public.”