Curran ClareCLARE CURRAN (Labour—Dunedin South): Taking a call on the third reading of this bill I support the member Eugenie Sage in her description of it as a small but useful bill. I did not sit on the select committee for this particular piece of legislation and my personal contribution to horticulture is trying to keep my vegetable garden producing when I am not there. However anything that involves supporting high-value export industries is something to be supported and Labour certainly supports this bill. I also support what the previous speaker Barry Coates said around the geographical indicators. The glaringly obvious—really—trajectory for an industry such as horticulture and for anything that we are particularly proud of in this country that we export and produce is to have it linked to a geographical part of the country. The technology will ultimately lead us in that direction but it will likely be a progressive Labour-led Government that will actually enable it.I note that my colleague Damien O'Connor in his speeches in previous readings talked about this being coordination and collaboration across primary sectors. Certainly this Horticulture Export Authority has been around for 29 years I think exporting to 100 countries with $300 million exports. It is clearly going on a trajectory upwards. That is all great and something to be supported. But as my colleague Damien O'Connor asked—and the Minister never really adequately answered this question in the Committee stage of this legislation—why not meat? Why are we not going down this route of formal collaboration with an authority that has a definite plan around it? Why are we not doing this in our meat industry? Why are we allowing our meat industry to continue to be so disunified?I also note that the amendment to have the levies in the primary legislation—also something that the Minister touched on only very lightly—had to be put at the Committee stage. What actually occurred with that stuff-up in this bill and why could he not address that during the Committee stage of the bill? I do not think he adequately addressed it during the third reading. I do think these things are important for transparency and I just want to put that on the record as well.Ultimately this is a bill that is a blindingly obvious bill that we would support. It talks about various product groups. There are various product groups that are forming across the way at the moment in the National Party. They are forming and taking shape—Richard Prosser: Do you think we should export them?CLARE CURRAN: We could export them but they are taking shape before our very eyes. When I was looking at the product groups that were listed under the Horticulture Export Authority I wondered what the synergies were. I was looking for swedes and potatoes actually which are not listed there and which I thought would characterise Bill English. But I thought it would be more likely to describe him as that old chestnut. Looking at Jonathan Coleman he is more like the nashi pear. It is on restaurant menus it is flashy but it is ultimately also a bit watery and tasteless. With Judith Collins you could talk about the tamarillo because you either love it or you hate it and it is quite tart—Hon David Cunliffe: Not tart enough.CLARE CURRAN: Well it is quite tart. But there has to be a fourth. There is a fourth option which I think is pitched as the truffle which ultimately could turn out to be the lemon.