Lees-Galloway Iain: Dairy Industry Restructuring (New Sunset Provisions) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Lees-Galloway Iain: Dairy Industry Restructuring (New Sunset Provisions) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:672;Page:18525] 
IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY (Labour—Palmerston North) 
: 
 I will refer to new section 148 substituted in clause 4 of the Dairy Industries Restructuring (New Sunset Provisions) Amendment Bill and particularly to new subsection (2) which refers to the terms of reference for the report the Minister has to consider in looking at whether competition in the dairy industry is strong enough. There are a number of matters in there that look at any specific competition concerns in any specified New Zealand dairy markets. The terms of reference specify the person or persons in the dairy industry who must be consulted and the method of consultation. 
I wonder whether in looking at whether there is enough competition in the dairy industry in New Zealand we have to look a little bit beyond the dairy industry and look at matters such as the price of milk. That is an issue of considerable importance to New Zealanders. In fact a number of people particularly health practitioners have raised concerns about the price of milk in New Zealand and the fact that for instance since April 2008 a litre of Home Brand milk at Foodtown has increased by 20 percent. When we consider that wages in New Zealand may be increasing at the rate of about 2 percent then that is a significant increase. When we think about competition which is what this bill is all about—competition in the dairy industry—then the prices that people are paying for milk and dairy products I would have thought would be quite an important factor in determining just how strong competition is in the dairy industry in New Zealand and whether New Zealanders are gaining the benefits from strong competition in New Zealand. 
In fact if we look further through the bill in new section 148 we see that the select committee has included under new subsection (9) “For the purposes of this section other relevant government agency means any agency of the Crown (other than the Commerce Commission) whether a department a corporation a Crown entity a Crown Research Institute or another organisation or instrument.” It might be that we need to listen to what the Ministry of Social Development is saying or what Work and Income New Zealand is saying. Maybe we should even be listening to Statistics New Zealand about what it is saying about food prices in New Zealand and wages in New Zealand and how those reflect the level of competition and the strength of competition in the dairy industry. 
We know that we have a problem in this country with the increasing price of the basics such as milk which is outstripping any increase in wages. In fact with wages essentially flat-lining at the moment and the cost of living increasing so much that is a very important part of taking into consideration just how strong competition is in the dairy industry in New Zealand. Ultimately that is what this bill is all about. It is about ensuring that there is strong competition in the dairy industry. In fact it is about giving a bit of a leg-up I suppose to some of the smaller players in the dairy industry so that they are able to participate and ensure that competition is strong. 
The hope of course I suppose for many New Zealanders who are just trying to get by from day to day is that strengthened competition would mean lower prices. That is not the case at the moment; we are not seeing lower prices at the moment. In fact we are seeing prices go up and up. 
So the Minister has to give consideration to a number of things. The Minister has to specify the date by which the report must be completed. That is a date “within 365 days after the date of a request made under subsection (1)(a);” as stated in new section 148(2)(a). That seems like an awfully long time. In my previous contribution I said we wanted to give certainty to the dairy industry. I wonder what the Minister’s view is on that length of time and I wonder what submitters to the select committee said about it. I note that it is a change that the select committee made to the bill. Not being a member of the select committee I would like to hear some of the background—whether submitters thought a year was too long not long enough or about right. It seems like an awfully long time for businesses in trying to plan or in trying to budget for the year ahead. Those 365 days might seem like a long time. Again that is a question to the Minister. We would appreciate his taking a call and clarifying some of the issues about that—and clarifying some of the other departments he might be referring to.