Read the final Bill at the link below:
The article below explaining the wider issues with this Bill was posted as the Food Bill was being proposed (the ‘read more’ link leads to a ‘page not found’):
Sick of high food prices and thought you could grow your own food and barter your way through the collapse?
· by Travellerev
Sick of high food prices and thought you could grow your own food and barter your way through the collapse? Think again because the NWO has come up with a genius solution to keep you hooked into the system.
Selling your veggies through a coop or bartering with your neighbours with the excess eggs your chooks give you will become illegal unless you have a permit. That’s right, the inalienable right of human beings to share, barter or trade with their own home grown food will become a government issued entitlement which can be revoked taking away your right to barter, share and trade with food you have grown even with friends.
There is a reason why governement is removing our right to grow and exchange our own food. No only does it create community which in turn creates freedom it also removes their (Corporates and Government AKA Middle management for Corporates) profits – and the profits are large!
Food Bill: Threat to seed saving and natural medicines? Guy Ralls (Organic NZ, July/August 2011 Vol.70 No.4 Issue)
The Koanga Institute’s directors say the Food Bill is a “significant threat” to heritage seed saving networks, and that “any bill saying people can’t exchange food and plant material is fascist in intent.”
The Food Bill, which went through a submission process late last year, is likely to have its second reading in Parliament in the next few weeks.
Bob Corker and Kay Baxter spoke out following confirmation by lawyers that the Food Bill will criminalise people who exchange seeds, plant material or home-raised produce – even by giving these away – if they cannot afford or are otherwise not granted a government licence to do so.
(Sadly the owner of the excellent aotearoaawiderperspective blog, Evelien Gilbert, passed away in 2016. RIP Evelien. You’re still greatly missed. )
The meme below is from the Wake Up New Zealand website:
Here is a letter to the Otago Daily Times from 2012 about the Bill’s implications, thanks to thecontrail.com for the following info & links:
9 Jan 2012. Also published by the NZ Herald
FOOD BILL WORRY NOT ALARMIST – (a confusing heading if ever there was one – deliberate?)
“Regarding the proposed NZ Food Bill (ODT 4.1.12) this is hardly “alarmist nonsense”. There is an abundant amount of actual video footage from the US showing “food safety officers” from giant food corporations and police officers aggressively raiding farms, small organic food businesses and private homes, sometimes at gunpoint, under exactly the same piece of legislation (US Senate Bill S510) as is being proposed by the NZ Government. While Kate Wilkinson can say that it is ‘alarmist nonsense that ‘Food Safety Officers’ would storm small businesses and maraes in NZ without warrants, the fact that the Bill, as proposed would allow such a scenario, is not good enough. The US and Canadian food Bills and now New Zealand’s are all virtually identical and are all designed to centralise the control of the food chain increasingly into the hands of the giant global food corporations such as Monsanto.” (Abridged)
From the NZ Herald
5:30 AM Wednesday Jan 4, 2012
Food Safety Minister Kate Wilkinson. Photo / Supplied The Government is giving assurances that a bill reforming food safety standards will not affect the Kiwi tradition of growing your own food and swapping it with friends and neighbours.
But Food Safety Minister Kate Wilkinson declined to say whether the Food Bill, which is likely to be passed into law this year, needed amendments to ensure some groups of low-risk food traders – including home-grown community vegetable sharing – would not have to clear compliance hurdles.
The bill aims to update 30-year-old legislation on food safety to better protect consumers.
A report from the Institute of Environmental Science and Research found that 88 per cent of food-borne diseases came from restaurants, cafes and takeaways in 2010; 31 per cent came from poultry or shellfish.
The bill creates four regulatory levels of safety based on relative risk, and puts responsibility for safety squarely on the person in charge of a food operation.
But doubt remains over whether some groups would need to be exempted from registering and have a national safety plan.
Such groups include community food swapping, and trading involving foods not straight out of the garden, such as jams, preserves or baking.
The Green Party is also pushing for small operators to be exempt from needing to have a national safety plan, because of concerns the compliance costs could push some out of business.
Ms Wilkinson declined interviews yesterday but said through a spokesman that there was nothing to fear in the bill.
“The bill will in no way stop the proud Kiwi tradition of growing and swapping veggies with friends and neighbours. It’s focused on those selling food for profit.
“At most, the vast majority of small suppliers who do fall under the bill will simply be required to ensure that their food is safe to consume.”
The spokesman also rejected criticism that food safety officers would have excessive powers under the bill, which would empower them to enter and search premises without a warrant in some circumstances and use any force necessary, while being immune from civil or criminal liability.
“The claims that they will start carrying guns and storming businesses and marae is alarmist nonsense,” the spokesman said.
But Green Party primary production spokesman Steffan Browning said that, however unlikely, the fact that the bill as proposed would allow such a scenario was not good enough.
“Having any government agent to be free from any liability seems quite unusual. Our police, for example, don’t even have that.”
He said it would be ridiculous for small operators to be caught up in high levels of compliance.
An online petition claiming the bill impedes the basic right to share food has attracted 25,526 signatures.
* Food-borne outbreaks for 2010
* Restaurant or cafe – 58.7 per cent
* Takeaway – 29 per cent
* Caterers – 5.8 per cent
* Supermarket or deli – 3.6 per cent
* Other – 2.9 per cent
Source: NZ Foodborne Disease Annual Report 2010
By Derek Cheng | Email Derek
From Rose at thecontrail.com:
www.nzfoodsecurity.org: the NZ Govt is firing off press releases like crazy about the Food Bill, saying it’s all OK. Below is a post from an apparent establishment insider who says it is NOT OK.
This is an important perspective from someone who understands the issue. If you wish to see some balance in the mainstream media to counter the propaganda, please SHARE this post.
Then, copy and send the entire text of this entry to the media list provided. The intention is to flood their inboxes, and help them get some perspective also. KIA ORA.
goldenagebeyond on 2012/01/14 at 3:26 am, commenting on Food, illegal? Not in my back yard.
I have just spent 3 hours reviewing (or attempting to review) NZ Government Food Bill 160-2
http://www.legislation.govt.nz/bill/government/2010/0160/latest/who… as well as a good selection of the comments made by the select committee.
Just to add some perspective, I have a PhD in population ecology (U of California at Santa Barbara), I have spent most of my working life as an Environmental Analyst including 15 years as a Programme Specialist and finally as a Director with UNESCO.
In all my years working with the highest International policy levels dealing with environmental management relating to Human System I have never encountered any regulatory document anywhere that even vaguely approaches the detail present in this document. The time taken to draft this cunningly contrived control mechanism would run into hundreds of thousands of person-hours. The cost of drafting anything like this complex control mechanism would be VAST, probably running into the millions of dollars. The scope of the document is absolutely incredible. It allows for the state to absolutely deploy its full capacity to control even the minutest levels of food and food-related components. If desired, this could even include a food-plan to cover what one might feed a dinner guest along with the associated proscriptions and punishments that might be involved in case of deviations there from. I say allows because everything and almost any related thing can be â€œallowedâ€ by the Minister (or not), in addition to the thousands of specific conditions cited.
This is a comprehensive control-mechanism pure and simple. Its political purpose is clear: the source of funding to support drafting the template for this item are quite clear and many people have already alluded to this in the comment-stream above. What kinds of free-trade agreements do you think will develop with this sort of thing as the back-stop? True, it allows for rules and procedures to be formulated to help ensure that the food one buys is â€œsafeâ€ but that is not the primary intent of Bill 160-2 at all. Nothing other than the full and explicit control of society is intended through so called food management. Food (energy) is the fundamental ecological choke-point that governs all living systems.. Think about it folks.
NZ Food Security: for “source of funding etc” as above see www.nzfoodsecurity.org/codex-nz. Also research the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement. Finally, we will say this: this man, or woman, is brave. We thank them. If genuine, they are risking their career and more by sharing this information. And they are doing it for you. Please take note.
Government rejects further changes to Food Bill
Sat, 28 Jan 2012
The Government is assuring food traders a Bill reforming the industry does not need further protection for small traders, nor do the proposed powers for food safety officers need to be curbed.
The Food Bill, which will reform the food industry by introducing a new regime for food safety, has been criticised for adding compliance costs to small traders and community growers.
The powers of food safety officers have also been questioned. Under the Bill, officers do not need search warrants in some circumstances, and can use reasonable force to do their duty.
They are immune from criminal or civil liability.
Food Safety Minister Kate Wilkinson this week moved to allay some of the fears about the Bill, including about food safety officers.
“They have the same powers as under the current Act. They are not going to be armed, and they still have to act reasonably and in good faith – and if they don’t, they will be open to prosecution.”
Food Bill in New Zealand takes away your right to grow food.
Government Bill – 160—2
Here are some snippets:
– It turns a human right (to grow food and share it) into a government authorisedprivilege that can be summarily revoked.
– It makes it illegal to distribute “food” without authorisation, and it defines “food” in such a way that it includes nutrients, seeds, natural medicines, essential minerals and drinks (including water).
– By controlling seeds, the bill takes the power to grow food away from the public and puts it in the hands of seed companies. That power may be abused.
– Growing food for distribution must be authorised, even for “cottage industries”, and such authorisationcan be denied.
– Under the Food Bill, Police acting as Food Safety Officers can raid premises without a warrant, using all equipment they deem necessary – including guns (Clause 265 – 1).
– Members of the private sector can also be Food Safety Officers, as at Clause 243. So Monsanto employees can raid premises – including marae – backed up by armed police.
– The Bill gives Food Safety Officers immunity from criminal and civil prosecution.
– The Government has created this bill to keep in line with its World Trade Organisation obligations under an international scheme called Codex Alimentarius (“Food Book”). So it has to pass this bill in one form or another.
– The bill would undermine the efforts of many people to become more self-sufficient within their local communities.
– Home-grown food and some or all seed could not be bartered on a scaleor frequency necessary to feed people in communities where commercially available food has become unaffordable or unavailable (for example due to economic collapse).
Questions you should be asking yourselves…
Why has there been no coverage in the mainstream media?
Why is the government trying to sneak this through without your knowledge?
Who is our government really working for?
The Bill can be viewed here http://www.legislation.govt.nz/bill/government/2010/0160/latest/DLM…
You must be logged in to post a comment.