Carter David: Veterinarians Bill — First Reading 
Carter David: Veterinarians Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:623;Page:18761] 
Hon DAVID CARTER (National) 
: 
 National will support the Veterinarians Bill to the Production Committee but in my comments today I want to make two or three points. Firstly I express my concern about the regular use and abuse of Standing Order 289 whereby a bill is referred to a select committee and the committee is given 6 months to consider the bill and report it back to the House. Yet again we will see a bill referred to the Primary Production Committee with a guillotine applied to it on the very day the Minister introduces it into the House. 
I learnt today for the first time that the Primary Production Committee will be instructed to work on this legislation and report it back to the House on 14 June this year. I assure the Minister that the Primary Production Committee works very cooperatively and will adhere to that instruction but I say to him that it is my understanding that this bill has been prepared and sitting on the Minister’s desk since the latter part of last year. It could have been presented last year which would have made this guillotine option unnecessary. I also note that the bill has been sitting on the Order Paper since 25 January. So I say to the Minister inexperienced though he is that it is time he got his act together because this legislation is important for the Veterinary Council for the Veterinary Association and for the vets around New Zealand. 
Secondly I want to talk about the significant disappointment expressed in comments I have heard from the industry whereby there has been no liaison between the industry and the Minister’s office because the Minister of Agriculture—the silent Hon Jim Sutton—forbade the officials to liaise with the industry. That means that the legislation now to be presented to the select committee will require considerable work—and considerable submissions from the industry—as again it is asked by this Government to tidy up the mess. I say to the Minister while he is in the Chamber that I have little doubt that if only he had allowed the officials and the industry to work together cooperatively and collaboratively the legislation being read today for the first time would be substantially better. But rest assured yet again the Primary Production Committee will come to the rescue of the Minister. We will do the work on the bill that should have been done before being presented to the select committee. I give my undertaking today that again we will make sure the legislation comes back into the House in far better shape than the committee receives it. 
What this dysfunction of the Minister of Agriculture in forbidding discussion between bureaucracy and the industry shows is a sign of absolute arrogance by Ministers. Ministers with “we know best” attitudes are not what any industry wants. It is time the Government and the Ministers got off their high horses and were prepared to accept the comments and the suggestions made by the industry because that arrogance is something that has been noted throughout New Zealand. It is something that we are seeing day after day in the House during question time and it is something that many many New Zealanders are saying they have had enough of. In mentioning and criticising the Hon Jim Sutton as the Minister of Agriculture I would be remiss not to suggest to him that he should take particular notice of this arrogance because only in the last 2 weeks it has been brought to my attention that two separate provincial branches of Federated Farmers have passed a vote of no confidence in him as Minister. 
Opposition Members 
: Oh! 
Hon DAVID CARTER 
: It is outstanding is it not? I have never known before a branch or provincial branch of Federated Farmers having to move motions of no confidence in the Minister. It is occurring because of the arrogance and the disconnection with the sector the Minister is meant to be representing. 
Jill Pettis 
: Don’t be ridiculous. 
Hon DAVID CARTER 
: Jill Pettis says: “Don’t be ridiculous.” She should say that to farmers belonging to Bay of Plenty Federated Farmers and Marlborough Federated Farmers who after working and slaving for the economy of New Zealand go off to a meeting at 7.30 at night to discuss their concerns and the result of their concerns is a substantial notice of motion of no confidence in the Minister of Agriculture—and Jill Pettis the member for Whanganui interjects that we should not be ridiculous. I say to her that that sort of arrogance will cost her a place in this House after the next election. She is gone! Any time now we will be having her valedictory speech because she will not be back. The reason she will not be back is the arrogance that is now throughout the Government. 
I want to make another comment on the principal purpose of the bill which is to establish a far more flexible regime for recognising qualifications and allowing vets to operate in this country and I applaud that. It will be essential because what is happening now is that our young veterinarians are leaving Massey University and because the pay conditions and lifestyle in places like Australia are so substantially superior to what we have in New Zealand they are leaving this country. There is a lack of rural veterinarians throughout New Zealand and we will therefore have to start attracting people who have not qualified at Massey University. We will have to start attracting people from other universities and have a sensible regime that allows those people to qualify. However the point to be noted is that it is an absolute shame that we are putting that investment into young New Zealanders—and I happen to know of one personally in my own extended family who did a 5-year Massey University course and who is now operating in Melbourne—only to have that outcome and that is something that this Government should take heed of. 
The final issue I want to comment on is the genuine vulnerability in relation to vet practices. I had a discussion recently with some of my colleagues and members of the profession and it was recognised that while stud breeders with a high-value animal may continue to have significant involvement with the veterinary profession as the vet charges continue to increase because of compliance costs that have been imposed by this Labour Government the economics of calling a vet on to a commercial farm become more and more questionable. When that happens I am genuinely concerned that there will then be a dislocation between the veterinary profession and many commercial farmers. That is a long-term danger for New Zealand if we remember that agriculture is still the backbone of our economy. The buoyancy of the last 5 years has not been because of Dr Cullen one iota—quite the opposite in fact. The buoyancy is because of agriculture in this country but as we see rural veterinary practices put at some risk economically and commercial farmers having less and less contact with vets then we are at serious risk of their being a lack communication a lack of knowledge and a lack of extension occurring at the farm gate. I raise that as a genuine concern and as something that worries me as a practising farmer. 
Those comments come from a person—myself—who is currently a farmer and who was also a stud breeder for a number of years. In the time I was a stud breeder I had considerable contact with the veterinary profession and I learnt a lot from it. But as we move into intensive agriculture farmers will be in a position of having to monitor the cost of each veterinary call and question the economics of calling a vet on to the farm and if that happens things will be at risk. 
I look forward to working with my colleagues on the Primary Production Committee as we progress the Veterinarians Bill. We will adhere to the guillotine instruction given by the Minister today and make sure the bill is back to the House before 14 June. Finally I guarantee that the bill will come back as usual in far better shape than the shape in which it is presented to the select committee today.