McCully Murray: Biosecurity Amendment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
McCully Murray: Biosecurity Amendment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:609;Page:7062] 
Hon MURRAY McCULLY (NZ National—East Coast Bays) 
: I have listened very carefully to the debate on this part. I know that under urgency Governments sometimes feel moved to put the pressure on for time and take a parsimonious view of the contribution that should be made by the Minister in the chair and other Government members. However I remind the Minister who now sits in the chair that in the course of debating this part one of my colleagues raised some very important questions on behalf of a constituent. He has not yet had the courtesy of a response and I say to the Minister that he will not get off the hook quite that easily. 
Hon Dr Michael Cullen 
: Oh dear! 
Hon MURRAY McCULLY 
: The Deputy Prime Minister might not think it is important but he was not here. He should know that one of Mr Tisch’s constituents in the Piako electorate is a ferret farmer. 
Rodney Hide 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I think you will be able to anticipate this point of order. It is not fair to refer to the presence or absence of Ministers in this Chamber. It is outside the Standing Orders. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The member is absolutely right. It is a convention in this House that people do not refer to the absence of members. I did not hear a comment because I was otherwise engaged with the Clerk. 
Hon MURRAY McCULLY 
: I plead guilty to a technical infraction which I was goaded into by the intemperate behaviour of the Deputy Prime Minister but I concede that I was in error and will try not to repeat the offence. I am indebted to my friend Mr Hide for pointing out my deplorable conduct on this occasion. 
I say to the Minister in the chair that he had better get up and take a call because I will go for another call after this one unless he does. Mr Tisch has a constituent who has a $1 million export business which the Minister of Finance should be interested in. Mr Tisch thinks that as a consequence of clause 4(6) of this bill that particular constituent will be put out of business. He is entitled to an answer. The Minister who is warming the chair better get used to the fact that he cannot go driving people out of business with a bill like this which is being pushed through under urgency and not take a call. Mr Cunliffe who is very fine at lauding his credentials around this place had better use those credentials and stand up and tell the Committee the answer to Mr Tisch’s perfectly reasonable questions. Is Mr Tisch’s constituent going to have his business taken away from him by this part? Yes or no? I will go for another call. I know that Mr Hide will and I can see that Mr Tisch will also go for another call. His constituent deserves to know whether clause 4(6) will put this ferret-farming export business of $1 million a year out of business. The Minister is pretending to read a comic or a women’s magazine or something while I am asking these questions. I want him to stand to take a call. 
I have been reading the briefing notes and it is quite clear what the reason for this measure is. I have just looked at the list of invaders that have got in as a consequence of the loopholes in the legislation and I see that the Minister is the Minister who in 2002 brought the avian poxvirus to New Zealand. I want to know what that Minister will do to make amends for the invasion of the avian poxvirus in 2002. Clearly that is an important reason that this measure has been brought to the Committee. I want to know what this Minister can tell the Committee tonight will be the case in relation to that very serious threat to biosecurity—the avian poxvirus—as a consequence of the Committee being troubled to pass this bill under urgency tonight. I conclude by saying that Mr Tisch’s constituent’s business is in need of those answers.