Carter David: Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Carter David: Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:642;Page:11946] 
Hon DAVID CARTER (National) 
: 
 I am grateful for the opportunity to start the debate on Part 1 of the Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Amendment Bill in its Committee stage. Of course National is supporting this legislation. 
When the bill was reported back to the House last week National was certainly critical of the Minister. I know that the Minister was a little offended by that criticism but I guess her hide has thickened up over the last 24 hours with the Clint Rickards story in the paper. We had every right to be critical and our criticism was not around the content of the bill which has now been well and truly tidied up by the Primary Production Committee. 
Darren Hughes 
: An excellent committee! 
Hon DAVID CARTER 
: That is a very good compliment coming from the Government side of the Chamber and I thank Mr Hughes for acknowledging the excellent work of the Primary Production Committee on this particular legislation. 
The point National was making about the Minister was that we would have expected better from an experienced Minister such as the Hon Annette King in getting the legislation into a tidy form before handing it to the select committee in the first place.  
Hon Mark Gosche 
: What a lazy member! 
Hon DAVID CARTER 
: Now Mr Gosche is interjecting and accusing Annette King of being lazy! That is a most unfortunate remark. I know things are difficult within the Labour caucus but Mr Gosche is suggesting that Annette King is lazy. I would not have gone as far as that; I would have said that she was just busy with other portfolio interests and that perhaps she had not given enough attention to the Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Amendment Bill before it came before the select committee. Anyway as Darren Hughes politely acknowledges the bill has been tidied up well and truly to the satisfaction of the House. 
The second point I was certainly criticising the Minister for was the length of time it has taken to get the legislation progressing through the House. The select committee did its job and reported back on 29 May. As far as I am concerned nobody within the Chamber is objecting to the legislation as is evidenced by the second reading debate that was held last week. It seems to me that if the Minister had been really on top of the case she could have gone to the Hon Michael Cullen as Leader of the House and done a deal to get this legislation on to the agenda significantly quicker than has happened. 
I will ask one or two questions just to make sure that the Minister is on top of the portfolio. I am interested in new section 8B to be inserted by clause 10 “Director-General may list as exempt substances generally recognised as safe”. I want the Minister to tell us whether that provision was included in the original legislation or whether it is a new provision. I think she is looking at the bill—it is probably the first time she has read it. 
Hon Annette King 
: There’s no need to be nasty! 
Hon DAVID CARTER 
: No I am keen to get an answer. I am very very keen to get an answer as to whether this provision was in the original Act or whether it has been brought in recently for the first time. Also I ask whether the Minister could give the Committee a bit of an indication of the sorts of substances she thinks will be eligible for such an exemption. After such a good job was done at the select committee we do not want to find now that the exemption provision is a means by which there will be too much of a relaxation of the standards that have been set. If the Minister is ready to take a call on that point I would be very grateful to receive her response.