Hutchison Paul: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Hutchison Paul: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:608;Page:5694] 
12.  
Dr PAUL HUTCHISON (NZ National—Port Waikato) 
 to the  
Minister for the Environment 
: Will she support changes to the New Organisms and Other Matters Bill that are complementary to the changes recommended to the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act 1996 by the Biotechnology Taskforce “to ensure New Zealand has a world class regulatory system that … is quick and cost efficient”? 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS (Minister for the Environment) 
: 
 The New Organisms and Other Matters Bill is now before the select committee and I will take that committee’s recommendations into consideration. 
Dr Paul Hutchison 
: Noting that in the Minister’s press release of 8 May 2003 she stated that the words “cultural landscapes” and “spiritual” should be removed from the Resource Management Amendment Bill (No 2) because “they created unnecessary uncertainty” I ask whether she will now make a conscious decision to apply the same logic and remove similar confusing phrases relating to cultural and spiritual effects from the New Organisms and Other Matters Bill; if not why not? 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS 
: “Spiritual” is within the call-in provision of the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act. In the Resource Management Amendment Bill (No 2) it was within an extended definition of historic heritage. They are quite different contexts. 
Dr Wayne Mapp 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The Minister was asked a specific question: would she remove it? She did not answer. Simply talking about the subject matter then saying that that addresses the question does not obviate the need actually to answer a question that has been asked. A direct question was asked. She must know the answer. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The Minister could perhaps elaborate just a little on her answer. She does not have to give “a direct answer”. However I am sure she can address the question. [ 
Interruption]  
That member is lucky today—very lucky. I am on my feet. The Minister could perhaps just address the question as originally asked. 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS 
: Because the word “spiritual” is used in different contexts: one in the Resource Management Act in the definition of historic heritage; and one as a provision for call-in in the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act. I do not expect that it will be removed. 
Nanaia Mahuta 
: What reactions to the New Organisms and Other Matters Bill has the Minister heard of? 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS 
: During the first reading debate on the bill all speakers in this House spoke in favour of the bill except of course for the Green Party. Even the leader of the National Party spoke in favour of the bill saying how important it was for New Zealand’s future biotechnology. Clearly however he has no sway in his caucus because when it came to the vote the National Party consciously or unconsciously voted against the bill. 
John Carter 
: I was going to leave this till later but I now admit to making a mistake. I voted incorrectly and I seek the leave of the House to correct the vote to 27 in favour. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That is a perfectly fair comment. The member has sought the leave of the House to change a vote that was made on behalf of his party. Does anyone have any objection to that course being followed? 
John Carter 
: In favour instead of against. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The vote is to be changed to “in favour” instead of “against”. There is no objection. We will come back with new numbers and I will announce it to the House accordingly but that has been given the leave of the House. 
Jeanette Fitzsimons 
: Does the Minister think that a world-class regulatory system would establish strict liability for any harm caused regardless of whether the law had been broken instead of letting the cost of any disaster fall on society at large as the bill proposes? 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS 
: A world-class regulatory system has actually been devised in this bill for some liability not the liability that the member has envisaged there. 
Larry Baldock 
: In the light of the biotechnology task force recommendations for changes to the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act will she consider amending the New Organisms and Other Matters Bill to ensure the Bioethics Council is used to complement existing Environmental Risk Management Authority processes—thereby assisting in the timely progress of applications under the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act—and does not become a source of duplication? 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS 
: The Bioethics Council is designed to be the Government’s future watch and will not look at individual applications which is the Environmental Risk Management Authority’s responsibility. I think the council’s task is almost in line with action 18 of the biotechnology task force. 
Dr Paul Hutchison 
: I seek leave to ask a further supplementary question as I understood from my whips that we had not as yet— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member is entitled to seek leave. Is there any objection? There is. 
Dr Paul Hutchison 
: I seek leave to table a paper regarding the Minister’s press release of 8 May where she said referring to spiritual and cultural landscapes: “The removal of these words is sensible because they created unnecessary uncertainty.” 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that paper. Is there any objection? There is.