Seymour DavidDAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): I rise on behalf of the ACT Party in opposition to this bill. In reference to comments made by the member who just resumed her seat Denise Roche is it not curious that she said it was ideological to point out the practical difficulties in implementing this bill and then went on to say that if only we had enough belief then the bill could work? Some members might think that the latter was ideological and the former was practical but in the world of the Green Party things can sometimes get a little bit messed and muddled.I would like to join members in tributing the author and introducer of this particular bill Mr Peeni Henare. Nothing that Mr Peeni Henare brings to this House could possibly be poorly intentioned. I will say something else for this bill: it is much much better than the lost luggage bill vastly better and I commend—Hon Members: Aw!DAVID SEYMOUR: —oh that is a bit unfair—I commend the member for bringing a bill that does have good intentions and does at least in theory seek to solve a serious problem. We have heard a little bit about William Wilberforce and Amazing Grace and I would like to join with Rino Tirikatene in commending that film to any members who have not seen it. It is a fabulous narrative of an important part of this nation's cultural history and the efforts of a parliamentarian William Wilberforce in ending slavery. However that is about where I part company with the bill and it comes down to the practical difficulties of actually tracing the origins of the components in a particular product.If we cannot talk about William Wilberforce I would like to talk about another great thinker Leonard Read who is the author of an essay that I would commend to all members of the Committee. The essay is called I Pencil: My Family Tree as told to Leonard E. Read" and it explains the difficulties in identifying all of the people engaged in manufacturing something as simple as a pencil. Throughout the essay if you care to follow it—I will not give you the whole thing—he traces the copper that holds the rubber on top of the pencil. It had to be mined somewhere; somebody had to manufacture the mining equipment; somebody had to drill for and transport and refine the oil that fuelled the mining equipment—and that was just to extract a small part of the copper that held the rubber on top of the pencil. He then went on to talk about the timber involved the paint the graphite—or the lead as people call it—and every other aspect of distribution retailing logistics and so on that goes into the consumption of one single pencil.Even a product that simple has so many contributors to its construction that it is impossible for anybody to truly trace the origins of something as simple as a pencil. Of course most products we consume are far more complex than a pencil. The point that Leonard Read sought to make when he wrote that essay is that no Government department would ever be able to have knowledge of to anticipate and to plan the manufacture of something as simple as a pencil. And so it will come to pass if this bill is to become a law that as wonderful as the fine men and women who—Clare Curran: What's the alternative? Do nothing?DAVID SEYMOUR: —work for the New Zealand Customs Service are—we are getting to the alternative Ms Curran. Just be patient.Chris Bishop: Good things take time.DAVID SEYMOUR: Absolutely. The Customs Service will not be able to trace the origins of every aspect of any product and all of the people involved in its production.Our Government needs to focus its efforts on doing a few important things well. Can I make the suggestion—as many members in opposition to this bill have already raised—that there are a wide range of consumer information devices brands enabling consumer choice and people who specialise in marketing the ethics of their products including Paul Foster-Bell's wonderful chocolate which actually provide the kind of information consumers seek in order to make ethical choices far more efficiently than the fine men and women of the New Zealand Customs Service ever will. For those reasons—they are not ideological; they are purely practical a distinction I hope that Denise Roche will understand one day—I oppose this bill. Thank you."