No fines or recalls for food with illegal levels of potentially harmful agrichemicals in last five years

Not a single fine or recall has been issued for food with illegal levels of potentially harmful agrichemicals in at least five years, despite dozens of breaches.

The Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI), had sent "educational letters" to seven businesses since 2020, but had not recalled food nor prosecuted any business during that time.

An academic told RNZ the lack of action risked undermining trust in New Zealand's exports.

The ministry's annual testing regime - the Food Residues Survey Programme or FRSP - tested hundreds of samples for hundreds of chemicals to ensure they were under the maximum residue level set by law.

It was an offence to sell food with residues above the levels.

Last month, RNZ revealed testing in 2015 found a third of wheat samples had glyphosate - the active ingredient in RoundUp and other herbicides - levels exceeding the legal limit, some by 50 times.

The ministry has not tested for glyphosate in its annual monitoring since 2015.

It was those breaches that prompted the review of maximum glyphosate levels underway, which could see some levels increased exponentially.

Analysis of testing for other agrichemicals showed despite multiple breaches of maximum levels across dozens of chemicals the ministry had not recalled food and had not issued fines, penalties or warnings in at least the past five years.

The only enforcement taken as a result of the 75 breaches consisted of educational measures.

The ministry defended its approach, calling it "international best practice".

University of Canterbury biology professor Jack Heinemann said residue limits were about more than human health, and breaches posed a serious risk to New Zealand's exports and international reputation.

He pointed to the upheavals after the Japanese government identified repeated breaches of glyphosate residue limits in New Zealand honey in 2021.

"MRLs are used internationally to monitor the safety of food being traded. New Zealand has exceeded MRLs in some food products being exported to other countries and those food products have been rejected. A regulator who ignores those MRLs, or is too tolerant of excess residues, places our safe food export reputation at risk."

There were legitimate, permitted practices for off-label use of some chemicals, Heinemann said.

"But you'll also notice in those [NZFS] reports there's a number of compounds being detected for which no off-label use is permitted, and it seems to me that's something the regulator should take very seriously."

Acute and chronic health risks and other factors, such as differences in body weight, were taken into account when regulators set maximum residue limits, he said.

"When it comes to some of the compounds that have been detected in our food, these compounds have exceeded the maximum residue limits, and in some cases they may have also exceeded by a good margin the potential [acceptable daily intake] depending on body weight and the kind of food."

The limits were also a key mechanism to provide confidence in the food supply, he said.

"You can let that equation down by ignoring them or not being transparent about the reasons why in some cases you are exempting or not prosecuting or not following up," he said.

"There's lots of ways in which people can lose confidence in their food supply, so we wouldn't want such an obvious measure to go unexplained or to be treated with too much ability to walk away from enforcing."

Greenpeace campaigner Gen Toop said the lack of action showed "a very lackadaisical approach to food safety from the very body that is charged with ensuring food is safe in New Zealand".

The ministry routinely recalled food when there were cases of acute food poisoning, Toop said.

"But toxic pesticides don't necessarily cause acute symptoms when they're at residual levels on our food - they're more associated with chronic long-term health impacts, so New Zealand Food Safety is managing to quietly get away with just leaving them on the shelves, but that doesn't mean that it's safe," she said.

"A food product that has thirty times the legal limit of a pesticide so toxic it's now banned in New Zealand - that should have gone to prosecution.

"That food should never have made it to the shelves, or it should have been pulled off them and there should have been some very strong messages sent to the food producers of New Zealand that it's unacceptable to use chemicals in a way that is illegal, that's not allowed on the product use label, and in a way that breaches the maximum residue limits.

"Instead, NZFS has been sending a clear message that you can do what you like... we're not really bothered if you breach the maximum residue limit. In fact, in some cases, when it comes to glyphosate, we'll just stop looking at it. It's not even about not prosecuting, its we found some breaches, so we'll stop monitoring it so we don't find anymore."

She believed New Zealand Food Safety falling under the auspices of the Ministry for Primary Industries was part of the problem.

"[NZFS] should not be within the same organisation that is charged with promoting New Zealand's primary producing export market. It doesn't make any sense to be nested in there."

The 2022 - 2023 FRSP report found 33 instances of breaches of the maximum residue limits from 27 samples.

The majority of the breaches were a result of growers applying agricultural chemicals off-label.

Three samples had illegally high residues of a highly-toxic, now-banned insecticide called methamidophos, which the World Health Organisation classified as highly hazardous.

At the time of the breaches, methamidophos was authorised in New Zealand for restricted use, but was being phased out and banned from the crops it was detected on.

Methamidophos breaches were also detected in previous surveys.

Chlorpyrifos, another organosphosphate which was banned in the European Union, United States, Canada and the United Kingdom, was found at illegal levels on broccoli and kale with both growers previously breaching the limits.

Neonicotinoid insecticides imidacloprid and thiamethoxam - which have been banned in the European Union and United Kingdom due to the risk they pose to bees and other pollinators - were also detected at illegal levels, as was acetamiprid, which was under review in the EU.

Four of the six previous reports found breaches of another banned pesticide called diazinon.

The Environmental Protection Authority announced a ban on the pesticide in 2013 with a 15-year phase out period.

The United States banned its residential use in 2004 and restricted it to specific crops, the European Union banned its use in 2007, and Australia's ban would come into force later this year.

Other breaches in the past five years include sulfoxaflor, which has been banned for outdoor use in the EU and parts of the US, linuron (banned in the EU in 2017); propiconazole (banned on food crops in the EU in 2018); methomyl (banned in the EU in 2008) and epoxiconazole (banned in the EU and UK).

New Zealand Food Safety acting deputy director-general Jenny Bishop confirmed there had been no prosecutions in the past five years.

MPI could not say when, or even if, it had last prosecuted a producer for exceeding maximum levels.

New Zealand Food Safety deputy director-general Vincent Arbuckle said none of the breaches posed food safety risks, and the vast majority of test results - 99.99 percent - were under the legally allowed limit.

"For each of these detections we conducted a rigorous scientific food safety assessment to ensure there was no risk to consumers, which is standard practice," Arbuckle said.

Each non-compliance was carefully followed up, and the product was traced back to the grower or supplier with the ministry requesting they identify the cause of the breach, he said.

Food recalls would be undertaken if a food safety concern was identified, and in more serious cases, MPI would consider prosecution, he said.

"Our monitoring system is working well and is picking up the relatively low level of non-compliance where it is occurring and helps us to take action where required," Arbuckle said.

Where non-compliant test results were identified, the businesses changed their practices where directed, Arbuckle said.

Asked about growers who had been found to breach the limits more than once, Bishop said there were approximately seven companies which exceeded the limits more than once since 2020.

"All were assessed for food safety issues and none was found," she said.

MPI determined the appropriate corrective action had been taken and further escalation was not necessary, she said.

Last year, the Ministry for Regulation led a review - alongside MPI, NZFS, the Ministry for the Environment and the Environmental Protection Authority - on agriculture and horticultural products, triggered by "concern from farmers, growers, and businesses that the regulatory burden on these products was impacting New Zealand's international competitiveness," according to the ministry's website.

In May, Cabinet agreed to all sixteen of the review recommendations, including a new fast-track approval process for pesticides deemed a priority, allowing industry to "self-assess" some hazardous chemicals, and accelerating the approval of hazardous substances.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.