Let’s start with a question: Why should we care about what’s happening in the United States when it comes to glyphosate?
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (RFK Jr.) is making waves with his plans to investigate the health impacts of pesticides like glyphosate through his upcoming “Make America Healthy Again” (MAHA) report. Some U.S. officials are already pushing back, worried that tighter regulations might disrupt food production.
But here’s the thing—while RFK Jr. is rallying to challenge the safety of glyphosate, the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) here in New Zealand is proposing to increase the allowable levels of glyphosate residues in food. Confusing? Absolutely.
So, What Exactly Is MPI Proposing?
Here’s the gist: MPI wants to bump up the maximum residue levels (MRLs) for glyphosate in some of our most common crops.
- Wheat, barley, and oats: From 0.1 mg/kg to 10 mg/kg
- Dry field peas: From 0.1 mg/kg to 6 mg/kg
Their reasoning? Apparently, the current MRLs are “outdated” and don’t match international standards or reflect current agricultural practices. Sounds like an efficiency argument, but at what cost?
Think about it: Increasing MRLs by up to 100 times. Shouldn’t we be asking why, in a world supposedly moving towards healthier, more sustainable practices, New Zealand is considering more glyphosate on our plates?
Is It Really Just About Trade?
MPI’s consultation document claims these changes will “align New Zealand with international standards.” It’s a familiar line. When in doubt, say it’s just about keeping up with global norms, right?
But here’s the kicker: not all countries are moving in the same direction. RFK Jr. is rallying to reduce pesticide use in the U.S. amid growing evidence of potential health risks. So why are we heading the other way?
It’s not just policymakers raising eyebrows. Public concern here is growing too. Many Kiwis are questioning whether increasing glyphosate (Roundup) residues in our food is really the right move, especially when it clashes with the image of a clean, green New Zealand.
How can we claim to be leaders in sustainability while choosing to increase allowable levels of a controversial herbicide? Shouldn’t we be taking a more cautious approach, especially when global opinion on glyphosate is shifting?
The Elephant in the Room: Are We Ignoring Health Risks?
This isn’t just a political debate; it’s about the long-term health of New Zealanders. Increasing glyphosate levels in food without a thorough, New Zealand-specific risk assessment feels reckless. MPI might argue that the science is settled, but that’s not how scientific inquiry works—especially when it comes to public health.
And let’s not forget the legal battle on the horizon. Environmental groups are challenging the EPA’s refusal to reassess glyphosate use, claiming the decision was based on outdated science. Meanwhile, the consultation window on MPI’s proposal is closing fast—May 16, 2025—and once those changes are locked in, it could take years to reverse them.
What Can We Learn from the U.S.?
RFK Jr.’s advocacy shows that public health should take precedence over agricultural convenience. Whether his MAHA report actually changes U.S. policy remains to be seen, but it’s the principle that counts.
Why aren’t we taking a more cautious approach here? Are we willing to gamble on glyphosate just because our trading partners do? Or is it time to question whether aligning with international standards is always in our best interest?
Time to Take a Stand
This issue isn’t going away. If RFK Jr. gets traction in the U.S., it might just encourage us to look harder at our own policies. Shouldn’t New Zealand be leading the charge on pesticide safety, not playing catch-up to whatever global standards suit the moment?
Let’s not sleepwalk into this change. The consultation period ends soon, and the voices of everyday Kiwis need to be heard. Make a submission before the deadline—because once those MRLs go up, there’s no easy way to take them back.
Email your submission to: ACVM.Consultation@mpi.govt.nz
Submissions close Friday 16 May at 5pm
Sign the petition (click) here!
Stay informed, sign up to receive our newsletter!
Want to make an effective submission, but not sure what to say? Check out our guide: How to Make a Submission That Gets Noticed.
Final Thought:
If we don’t question the narrative now, we could be living with the consequences for decades. It’s time to ask: Are we willing to increase glyphosate exposure without concrete evidence that it’s safe?
Let’s think critically, act thoughtfully, and make sure our food policies actually protect us.
Image Source & Attribution
We’re grateful to the talented photographers and designers whose work enhances our content. The feature image on this page is by vicnt. You can find more of their work here: https://www.123rf.com/profile_vicnt.
