THE CHEMICAL BOY'S CLUB
Briefing Note - Tasmanian Premier and Minister for Forests
How the Tasmanian Government, Forestry
Tasmania & North Forest Products (since purchased
by Gunns)
colluded in assisting Ciba-Geigy
to keep the carcinogen Atrazine on the shelves in Tasmania,
when in the USA, the EPA was under pressure to review
Atrazine.
|
Forestry Tasmania THE
BRIEFING NOTE - IN PDF
The Hon. Ray Groom, MHA Premier and Minister for Forests
Briefing Note
Subject: CIBA-GEIGY MEETING ON ATRAZINE MELBOURNE 16.8.94
The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the proactive
approach that should be taken in relation to outlining the
uses of Atrazine.
In attendance were:
Herman Mani, Jim Swain, Zoe Hibbert, Ciba-Geigy
Ross Hills, Stewart Murrihy, North Forest Products
Brian Priestley Chemical Safety Evaluation Unit, NH &
MRC
Dr Mark Jacobs, Director of Public
Health, Tasmania
Gerard Brown, The Allen Consulting Group
Brian Hodgson, Forestry
Tasmania
The thrust of the meeting was how to deal with the use of
Atrazine as a chemical herbicide. It was recognized that
it is part of a bigger issue of anti-chemical use and anti-
forestry in Tasmania.
There is a wealth of information available on the scientific
aspects of the chemical.
Discussions hinged around the role of the National Registration
Authority and the public review process that is underway
for the Review of Existing Registered Chemicals. This is
a role that the NRA has under its charter, to systematically
review the registration status of all agricultural and veterinary
chemicals currently registered in Australia. The process
as to how this is to be undertaken is still being investigated.
An additional function for the NRA is an ad-hoc review of
any chemical it considers should be reviewed for whatever
reason.
Ciba-Geigy is contemplating asking the NRA to undertake
such a review. Even if a review of Atrazine was undertaken
by NRA under either of the above two mechanisms, and it
was cleared, there is no security for the chemical as it
could be politically canned if there is too much controversy
over its use. These reviews are open for public input so
anti-chemical people can have their day in court
It was resolved that a three point approach should be taken:
- Ciba to update its product information booklets and
distribute widely to appropriate people and organizations.
They will approach us later for additional names for
a mailing list. After Lorinna, they had a mailing list
of about 450.
- Ciba and NFP to set up a team to liaise with key people
Ministers for Agriculture, Health, Environment, etc
to provide briefings. NH&MRC (Brian Priestley) to
be involved. (He would prefer to be reactive to specific
requests for information, retain his impartiality and
not be proactive).
- Ciba is floating the idea of approaching NRA and asking
for an ad-hoc review of Atrazine. He would like our
support of such an approach. Although the NRA is participating
in the three year research program into issues of forest
use of Atrazine, this does not guarantee we have three
years grace in the use of the chemical. Either of the
two review processes mentioned above could pre-empt
the process.
In the USA, the EPA is under pressure to review Atrazine.
The American approach is very closely linked with the legalistic
implications of any decision. Atrazine is a big product
for Ciba in the USA for sorghum and they want to vigorously
defend its use in that country. The parent company in Switzerland
is still very anxious about the discrepancies of use rates
around the world. Jim Swain floated the idea of bringing
some of the executives from Basle out to look at sites in
Tasmania so they can get a better appreciation of the differences
between forestry and agricultural use of the chemical.
Australia is prone to any overseas issues on Atrazine.
The meeting was very positive, and I believe Ciba-Geigy
will be making a positive approach to outline the uses of
their product.
Prepared by: Brian Hodgson Executive Forester 33 8176
Cleared by: Evan R. Rolley Managing Director 33 8180
30 August 1994 |
|
