Goff Phil: Border Processing (Trade Single Window and Duties) Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeGoff Phil: Border Processing (Trade Single Window and Duties) Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:13113. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon PHIL GOFF (Labour—Mt Roskill): Before question time we were debating this riveting piece of legislation called the Border Processing (Trade Single Window and Duties) Bill. The bill amends the Customs and Excise Act 1996 and the Biosecurity Act 1993 to support the implementation of the Trade Single Window component of the joint border management system. These are ideas and concepts that were introduced initially under a Labour Government.This is not hugely controversial legislation. Labour is intending to support it. But lo and behold when the bill came up for its first reading who was the Minister moving the first reading motion? It was Craig Foss the Minister who was responsible forNovopay. The joint border management system is an IT system. It is designed to replace outdated systems in the Customs Service and in biosecurity in the Ministry for Primary Industries. When I saw Craig Foss the man responsible for the debacle overNovopayget up to move the first reading of this bill I almost recommended to Rino Tirikatene that we change our mind on whether we support it because after that debacle how could we have confidence in this IT system which is in fact the biggest single investment probably ever made by the Customs Service?A year afterNovopay there are still bungles that have not been sorted out and we have spent tens of millions of dollars more than was budgeted for a system that has failed. So how could we have confidence in this system? Then I read that the actual IT agency that is supplying the goods is IBM. IBM is the agency that about 12 years ago was responsible for the police INCIS system. The police INCIS system—I think you Mr Speaker were here at the time—cost $100 million and at the end of it they threw it away. That was $100 million of wasted investment.Between the combined influence of Craig Foss and the track record of the National Government time and again getting it wrong I wondered whether we should be supporting this legislation. Look let us be fair about it. Labour brought about the introduction of this legislation. It is designed to give the Customs Service and the Ministry for Primary Industries better information and risk assessment tools for targeting higher-risk trade and passengers. For Mr John Hayes who said that this had nothing to do with people I note that the joint border management system of course does include passengers though this tranche deals with goods and services. I am particularly worried as to whether this legislation which is inherently good legislation will be undermined by cuts that are being made to border security and biosecurity.Mr Hayes shakes his head but in 2009 that Government sacked 54 biosecurity officers from around the airports and the ports of this country. That was in 2009. In 2010 18 months later we hadPsa in this country.Psa has cost this country tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars and John Hayes knows that. So what I want to say to this Government is that it is penny wise and pound foolish. It will try to make cost cuts to save a little bit of money in the short term only to find that the long-term costs and risks to this country are immense.Then we saw the Budget this year and in terms of biosecurity the Government had chopped another $6 million. You can bring in whatever border security IT system you like but if at the same time you are undermining biosecurity by cutting costs and cutting the officers who are working hard to protect New Zealand its agriculture its exports and its lifestyle then you are wasting your money on this legislation. So I ask the Government how we can be confident that we will not see further botch-ups because at the same time as we are introducing this legislation we have seen restructuring of the Ministry for Primary Industries and the Food Safety Authority. At the same time that that was happening we saw an unprecedented failure in terms of quality assurance about our export goods on dicyandiamide on botulism—or the suspected botulism—on nitrates and on meat exports that sit on the wharves.I say again to this Government that yes it has been smart enough to pick up Labour’s idea on this legislation but not smart enough to stop cost cutting where it affects New Zealand’s vital interests and not smart enough not to restructure departments so that they no longer work. The Food Safety Authority is a classic example of that. I could talk about the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade which lost its key trade negotiators Mr Hayes and now John Key is saying “Maybe we’ve got to go out and recruit some.” Of course you have got to go out and recruit some because the botched restructuring saw some of the best people—and Mr Hayes knows this to be the truth—in the trade negotiation area lost.The Trade Single Window as a concept is a good idea. It will enable businesses to complete border requirements for customs food and biosecurity purposes through one electronic transaction. It will make compliance easier. It is better at providing risk-related information and for that reason Labour will support this bill despite the bungling and the botch-ups of the Government which has done so much damage in other areas of biosecurity and trade.