Woolerton R Doug: Biosecurity and Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Legislation Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Woolerton R Doug: Biosecurity and Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Legislation Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:645;Page:14334] 
R DOUG WOOLERTON (NZ First) 
: 
 It is as usual a pleasure to follow Mr Ardern because he is a practical and sensible man. He talked sense in that last speech and that is what we expect of him. We in New Zealand First will of course be supporting the Biosecurity and Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Legislation Amendment Bill because we cannot have the untenable situation where our imports and exports are impeded in any way at all. Quite frankly the sooner the bill is passed the better it will be. I am very pleased there is to be a submission process albeit a short one. It is important that people can come here have their say and be listened to. One of the strengths of our Parliament is that it has input from citizens and I think that process should be upheld whenever it can be—even in a crisis situation. 
I know and the National Party knows even if it does not admit this that this administration has hugely increased the spend on biosecurity—not only the spend on biosecurity but also the effectiveness manpower and the position it holds in the ranking importance of ministries in New Zealand. In the area of biosecurity one would be hard-pressed to moan that it has not had every reasonable resource it has asked for. However such is the increase in travel—in tourism and in people and goods over our borders—that it is never enough and there is always some problem that we have to deal with. 
The point I want to make follows on from Mr Ardern’s—that is the bee-keepers took a case in order to make a point. They took a case made their point and won their case but the reason they took it stemmed from their immense frustration with successive regimes because they believed they were not being treated well in this country. They have a great product and they are afraid that more organisms will come in that may damage their industry. I know that Mr Ardern has mentioned that concern and I share it. 
I make the plea—and I choose my words carefully—that it would be nice if the Government of the day could consider that the court has seen the worthiness of the bee-keepers’ case. As Mr Shane Ardern said—I will use slightly different words—if the Government could put away for a moment the ideology of the pure free market and just look at this case it would see we have a niche market in the world for our honey. Even in New Zealand it is understood and is used as a trade argument that our honey—particularly our tea tree honey—is so pure that in many cases it is used as an antiseptic as it has healing properties. It would be nice if the Government could put aside its ideology for a while and perhaps look on this case as being not so much a technical case which is what we have been hearing today but a message from the bee-keepers of this country to please do something to support them and to help them to keep their industry profitable. They are doing a good job and they should be recognised for that. 
If Parliament passes this legislation—which does need to be passed—and then does not treat bee-keepers with respect they will see that as a slap in the face and we will be doing ourselves a disservice. Certainly we will be harming an industry that I believe is after all one that does only good. If Mr Shane Ardern or any other member can think of one harmful aspect of the bee-keeping industry I would like to hear about it. I cannot think of one apart from a child perhaps stepping on a bee in a field of clover. Otherwise I cannot think of one negative aspect of the industry. Surely if any industry deserves sympathy this industry does. If we pass this legislation—and we will—and if the Government makes an accommodating factor for bee-keepers we will have a win-win situation. Thank you very much.