MPI claims to test food for chemical contaminants, but glyphosate — New Zealand’s most widely used pesticide — is missing. Oversight or by design? If the Minister for Food Safety isn’t monitoring glyphosate, who’s protecting our children’s food?
Glyphosate’s EU approval was rocked by revelations of ghostwritten papers, copy-paste assessments, and industry infiltration of committees. This isn’t just about the chemical — it’s about whether we can trust the process itself.
A Bill Few Want, But Still Moving Forward
The Health Select Committee has released its long-awaited report on the Gene Technology Bill. After months of hearings and nearly 15,000 public submissions — 97% opposed to the Bill — the Committee...
MPI is consulting on proposed changes to maximum food residue levels. While glyphosate isn’t included this time, other chemicals are — and your submission can make a difference before 5 December 2025.
Honey is marketed as “100% pure,” yet testing shows glyphosate residues slipping quietly into the jar. Beekeepers don’t want it, corporates work around it, and regulators call it “compliant.” But does legality equal safety — or has the social contract between producers, regulators, and consumers already been broken?
Federated Farmers say nothing will change on our breakfast tables. But MPI’s proposal to raise glyphosate limits tells a different story. From wheat and oats to imports and GMOs, we uncover how chemical creep quietly shifts the standard — leaving New Zealanders with more exposure, less transparency, and fewer choices.
Federated Farmers insist glyphosate isn’t in our food, but MPI’s residue limits, past test results, and the actions of oat companies suggest otherwise. Who’s really telling the full story?
When it comes to glyphosate, the people making the decisions aren’t scientists, doctors, or toxicologists — they’re politicians. Can ministers without expertise really protect public health when MPI is pushing for a 9,900% rise in glyphosate residues on our food?
