Power Simon: New Organisms and Other Matters Bill — In Committee 
Power Simon: New Organisms and Other Matters Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:612;Page:9071] 
SIMON POWER (NZ National—Rangitikei) 
: 
 Part 5 makes up the third part of the amalgamating triumvirate of the three pieces of legislation that will be amended as a result of this legislation. People who have been keen to make a contribution on Parts 3 4 5 and no doubt the schedule will be pleased to know that I have undertaken some research on the Biosecurity Act although Part 5 which relates to amendments to the Biosecurity Act looks harmless enough. To be fair I have to add that it is pretty lightweight research because Part 5 does not actually give rise to a whole lot of debate which is unusual. Often when we glance at these types of parts or clauses we are inclined to think at first glance that that is the case but once a member bores down into the detail of those parts and clauses he or she often finds that they are far more complex and in fact may pose some drafting difficulties at a later date. 
 I am pleased to advise the Committee that this has not been the case with Part 5. It seems to be a sensible and straightforward amendment to the Biosecurity Act. I do not pretend nor will I ever that I am expert on matters relating to science or biosecurity but it seems to me that the officials have guided us reasonably well through Part 5. During the Education and Science Committee process of course as the Hon Brian Donnelly pointed out to me during the extensive debate on Part 3 members of the select committee were given an opportunity to comment on these three parts. 
I have to say as a passing remark that the schedule is more interesting than Part 5. I am pretty much looking forward at this moment to the schedule being debated next. I have been building up because the schedule in fact provides members looking to make a contribution with a lot more material than Part 5 does. If members want to turn to the schedule we could finish the day’s debate on a reasonably high note. There is plenty of material in the schedule for a robust debate about the various vermin reptiles and other species contained in that schedule. I just want to assure members that I am advised by officials that none of those particular entries in Schedule 2 are biographical and members can be assured that they are in fact scientific terms which relate to those matters outlined. 
Perhaps the Minister would be interested when we get to the schedule in walking us through some of those scientific terms that those of us who are graduates with just law and arts degrees have struggled through. I challenge the Minister to take us through the American grey squirrel’s scientific name and I am sure she could. 
Returning as I must to the narrow Part 5 I want to assure the Committee that it seems—with the work that Brian Donnelly and other members of the select committee have done to split this bill into four pieces of legislation—that it has been done in a way that will be consistent with the general purposes of the bill and with the operational requirements set out in Part 2. I am confident that matters contained in Part 5 accurately reflect the legislation currently before the Committee. I am sure the legislation will be expedited in a way that will pass it into law within the time frames contained in Part 1 which was debated at so much length earlier in a way that surprisingly divided the House along lines that one would not think were historically reflective of the traditional positions that various parties in the House have taken on other issues. 
That has shown that despite the New Zealand public being of the view that politicians are constantly at each others throats the two major political parties in this Parliament have managed to agree in a substantive way on this legislation. Often that type of cooperation does not make the news and it is worth making the point at the late stages of this debate that the debate around Parts 1 2 3 4 and now the significant debate around Part 5 have been handled in a way that I think is probably pretty constructive. I congratulate the Minister on taking some calls during the course of the debate—something we do not see a lot of from various Ministers of this Government on the legislation that I have been involved with during my 4 short years in this House. But I do know that this particular Minister does— 
Sue Kedgley 
: Is this a valedictory? 
SIMON POWER 
: I tell Ms Kedgley that this is not a valedictory speech although we might have to get to that if this bell does not go shortly! So there I leave my comments on Part 5 and I look forward to making a contribution on the schedule.