A CAMPAIGN FOR CHEMICAL FREE FOOD WINS IN NEW ZEALAND

A CAMPAIGN FOR CHEMICAL FREE FOOD WINS IN NEW ZEALAND

Just when the fight for clean food and healthy soil seemed like a losing battle — now comes this victory. The win in New Zealand for food sovereignty is real, and it has lessons for us here in the Philippines.

The New Zealand Moment

In New Zealand, the government agency New Zealand Food Safety (operating under Ministry for Primary Industries, MPI) had proposed to dramatically raise the maximum residue level (MRL) of the herbicide Glyphosate in staple cereals – from the default of 0.1 mg/kg up to 10 mg/kg for wheat, barley and oats, and 6 mg/kg for peas. Many consumer-environment-farm advocates said NO WAY. Over 3,100 public submissions poured in. The result: the glyphosate entry in the MRL notice remained unchanged. 

This is a powerful moment for grassroots advocacy and food sovereignty. The decision to maintain low glyphosate residue limits (and at least to keep the entry unchanged while consultation is ongoing) reflects a major win for public health, soil protection, and democratic engagement.

What this victory represents

  • Community-led resistance: The fact that more than 3,100 submissions were lodged shows that when everyday people, farmers, activists and consumers join together, policy can shift.

  • Precautionary principle upheld: By rejecting the proposal to increase chemical residues by up to 100‐fold, the decision signals that long-term health and ecological integrity matter more than short-term convenience.

  • Momentum for clean food systems: This sets a precedent. If New Zealand can hold the line, other countries may follow.

So… could we duplicate that win here in the Philippines?

Yes — and I believe we must try. Here are the questions we need to ask ourselves:

  • Is there hope that this could happen here? Yes — hope exists when people speak out.

  • Could our government here listen if enough people speak out? It’s possible. The New Zealand example shows that public submissions work.

  • Or will we just give up, thinking: “We are not like the New Zealanders; we can’t do what they have done”? That would be a mistake. We are able to organize, engage, petition, and raise public awareness.

  • Is the Philippine government even aware of the need to set low glyphosate limits? Probably not fully, or at least it doesn’t appear to be a major public policy fight yet.

What should we watch and do?

Given our interest in circular design, community restoration and chemical-free systems, here are strategic implications:

  • Barangay-level food safety modules: Local government units and farmers’ groups should be educated on chemical-free practices and soil health.

  • Policy-mapping for agrochemical regulation: Compare Philippine thresholds for glyphosate and other agrichemicals with the New Zealand precedent. Ask: do we have default limits? Are they being reviewed?

  • Community petition frameworks: Use petitions, public submissions, social media, local government resolutions. The New Zealand case shows the power of public voice.

Caveats & realities

  • We should be cautious about presenting the New Zealand story as already done. The consultation was concluded with over 3,100 submissions; but the final decision on glyphosate MRLs remains under consideration.

  • The proposed increase in New Zealand was controversial because many believe the testing regime was weak, and that the very practice of pre-harvest desiccation (spraying glyphosate to dry crops before harvest) is questionable. 

  • The Philippines’ context is different: climate, cropping systems, trade-markets, regulatory capacity all differ. We must adapt, not just copy.

My take and suggestions

I strongly suggest that we in the Philippines begin a campaign for “glyphosate-tight” food production, rooted in the following points:

  1. Raise awareness: Many consumers may not know what glyphosate is nor what residue limits mean. Education matters.

  2. Mobilize a coalition: Farmers practising regenerative agriculture, civil society, consumer groups, health advocates can join forces.

  3. Engage LGUs: Local governments, barangays, provinces can pass resolutions or local ordinances favouring low-chemical or chemical-free grains and legumes.

  4. Use public consultation processes: Insist that any change to pesticide/chemical/residue regulation must go through open consultation with submissions.

  5. Benchmark: Use New Zealand’s current default of 0.1 mg/kg for certain cereals as a reference. Ask: what is our current limit in the Philippines? Is it being reviewed?

  6. Push for transparency: Make sure that residue surveys, testing of food, regulatory decisions are public. One of the objections in New Zealand was lack of updated testing. 

Final thought

This New Zealand “small win” is more than symbolic. It is a beacon for those of us in the Philippines who believe in food sovereignty, healthy soil, dignified farming systems. We should not assume “we are not like New Zealand”; rather, we should learn from it, adapt it, and apply it. If 3,100+ voices in New Zealand made a difference, imagine what a coalition of thousands in the Philippines could achieve.

Let us treat this as our invitation to action – to speak, mobilize, petition, collaborate. The government can listen – if enough of us make our voices clear. And in doing so, we honor the farmers, the soil, and the future of Philippine food.

Ramon Ike V. Seneres, www.facebook.com/ike.seneres

iseneres@yahoo.com, senseneres.blogspot.com 04-17-2026

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

HOW IS THE CRIME RATE COMPUTED IN THE PHILIPPINES?

HOW IS THE CRIME RATE COMPUTED IN THE PHILIPPINES? When we talk about the crime rate in the Philippines, we often assume that the figures we see are accurate reflections of reality. But have we ever paused to ask—how exactly is the crime rate computed? Where does this data come from, and how reliable is it? The computation of the crime rate in the Philippines is officially handled by the Philippine National Police (PNP). The formula itself is straightforward: Crime Rate = (Total Reported Crimes / Total Population) x 100,000 This simple equation gives us the number of crimes per 100,000 people, allowing for fair comparison across regions and time periods. However, the reality behind these numbers is more complex than it appears. Data from the Ground The foundation of our national crime rate is empirical data collected at the grassroots level—from individual police stations scattered across the country. Every reported crime is logged in local police blotters, forming the buil...
Read more

GREY AREAS IN GOVERNMENT FUNCTIONS

GREY AREAS IN GOVERNMENT FUNCTIONS Dear Mr. President: May I ask who is going to be the arbiter or referee whenever there are overlaps in functions between two or more government agencies? I imagine that there would be no problem if these agencies would just cooperate and collaborate with each other, but what if they are unable to settle their differences and they would just end up throwing blame at each other or finger pointing at each other? Allow me to cite some examples. Who is supposed to take the lead in waste to energy projects? Is it supposed to be the DENR that is supposed to handle waste? Or is it supposed to be the DOE that is supposed to handle energy generation? Or is it supposed to be the DILG since it is the one that could direct or influence the waste to energy projects of LGUs? Who is supposed to take the lead in producing and promoting the use of biofuels? Is it supposed to be the DA, since the production of biofuels is supposed to be all about planting biofuel ...
Read more

LOCALIZED FREE AMBULANCE SERVICES

LOCALIZED FREE AMBULANCE SERVICES As it is supposed to be, anyone in the Philippines should be able to dial 911, and a telephone operator should be able to dispatch fire, rescue, ambulance and police (FRAP) units as soon as possible, based on acceptable response times. I invented the FRAP acronym for easy recall, and I hope it sticks, if there is no other alternative. Unfortunately, due to a mixture of technical and political reasons, the Philippines has not adopted 911 as a national number, because some LGUs would rather use their own three-digit numbers such as 117 and 168. I actually proposed a technical solution to that problem, but it was not adopted either. For whatever it is worth, my solution is to install a call forwarding system that could route all calls to a central operator, regardless of what number is dialed. It is very sad for me to know that up to now, even if our country is already over one hundred years old, there are still many LGUs that do not have fire trucks. it ...
Read more