Anderton Jim: Financial Review Debate — In Committee 
Anderton Jim: Financial Review Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:630;Page:2428] 
Hon JIM ANDERTON (Minister of Agriculture) 
: 
 I have to say the biggest threat to any of the portfolios I represent would be if the National Party—if it ever got into Government—ever made Mr Ardern responsible for any of them. 
Shane Ardern 
: Just answer the question. 
Hon JIM ANDERTON 
: I will answer one. This Government has increased resources. There has been an 80 percent increase in baselines for biosecurity since there was a National Government. [ 
Interruption 
] What is it about an 80 percent increase that Mr Ardern does not understand? He clearly does not understand it so he should look at the facts. If Mr Ardern thinks I can make the decisions on biosecurity matters he should examine the Biosecurity Act and see who makes the decisions. It is the chief technical officer. 
Shane Ardern 
: I just told the Minister I have. 
Hon JIM ANDERTON 
: Well I suggest that the member read it again. 
Shane Ardern 
: I got the library to do it. 
Hon JIM ANDERTON 
: Can the member not read? 
I want to talk about the reality of accountability in this House. We were told by the first National Party speaker debating this report that I am on notice. Well all Ministers are on notice. They are on notice from the Prime Minister for a start who appoints them. They are accountable to the Prime Minister they are accountable to their Cabinet colleagues and they are accountable to their constituency which in this case is the agricultural and horticultural community. I suggest to Mr Ardern that he consult with that community sometimes. He has been railing about how I should not be here and how I should not do this or that but I have not noticed Federated Farmers saying that. It is a funny thing that in the  
Dominion Post 
 this morning I read the headline: “Farmers back Anderton …”. When did I ever dream that I would see a headline like that in the  
Dominion Post 
—that well-known socialist newspaper in Wellington? 
I know that Mr Ardern does not back Anderton but he may contemplate why it might be that Federated Farmers do not agree with him. This is supposed to be Mr Ardern’s constituency. Last time I looked at the electoral roll there was not one farmer in Wigram. But the farmers who do not live in my electorate and who do not actually vote for me there because they cannot—there are no farmers in Wigram—are supporting the existing Minister. They do not do so because they are all altruistic or will vote for a Labour-led Government this time or next time but because they recognise that when I asked them to give me their agenda so I could see what I could do I never said that I would fix everything. I did not say that; I said that I would give it my best shot and I did. I took my best shot to a Cabinet that had already made a decision. I say to members that they should try doing that some time. They should try taking to one’s Cabinet colleagues an issue that those colleagues have already decided on and try to get them to relitigate the issue and see how that goes. 
Did I think this would be difficult? Yes I did. Did I think that I did not want to take on something hard like that? No I did not. I gave it a shot. Federated Farmers to their credit know that I did not promise anything. I said I would try and I did and they know that. The fact is that Federated Farmers have expressed their support for the style I am showing because I am listening to them and I am going out there. I was surprised to be invited to practically every Federated Farmers annual meeting in the country. The meetings are all in May so it is a bit hard. What I have said is that I will go to these ones this year and the other ones next year—in the 3 years I have this portfolio I will visit every Federated Farmers AGM in the country. The National Party might like to look up in the library when the last National Minister of Agriculture visited in one term of office every single AGM of every Federated Farmers branch in the country and spoke to them. If National members can tell me when that last happened then we will see. That may be the secret as to why Federated Farmers are saying that they will give me a go. 
The other thing about it is that I am trying to make sure that city people—and there are more of them than country people—understand the points that Doug Woolerton was making. Here is an industry—including fishing in there which is not in today’s debate—that collectively earns 65 percent of our entire exchange-rate earnings. We are the country—developed or undeveloped—that is most dependent on our exports and their success in the world. The only global scale industry we have is our primary sector industry. The only globally competitive industry we have is our primary base sector industries and we depend on those for our economic and social well-being. If we do not have a First World economy it will be because those industries have not succeeded. If those industries do not succeed we will not have a First World health system we will not have a First World education system and we will not have a First World infrastructure—we will not have a First World anything. So it is critical that those industries succeed and we should not take that for granted. I say to members that it is no use thinking that because the sun shines the rain falls and the wind blows occasionally we will be OK on the night. We will not be. 
If one goes around the world one will understand. I have the privilege of being thrown out of the country occasionally by the Prime Minister to have a look—as I did recently although I do not like to travel much. The image that most New Zealanders have of say French agriculture is of an over-subsidised bloated peasant-type industry. But a combination of all of the event centres in New Zealand put together with most of our largest malls would look something like the International Agricultural Show in Paris. The elite agriculture of France is on display—the highest technology the highest science-based research the highest productivity and all the rest of it. It is true that it is more costly than ours because of all the grain-fed animals but nevertheless it is highly competent highly efficient and very productive. So we have some real competition out there and that does not include the emerging Eastern European nations and everything else that is coming at us. 
The world does not owe us a living in those areas and one of the things that New Zealanders have to acknowledge is that we are good at it because we have invested a lot of money in scientific research into the development of our pastoral farming animal husbandry and all the rest of it. So scientific research and development is crucial. This is a real challenge for New Zealand and I do not see the ministry as being partisan because the whole of New Zealand depends on its success. I do not think urban communities fully comprehend this because in many ways urban communities are now much more separate than they once were from rural communities in terms of the activities of rural communities. 
Almost at the bottom of the Western Springs street I used to live in was a dairy farm. Western Springs is now a close inner-city suburb of Auckland. It was on the outskirts of Auckland when I lived there in the 1940s. 
Hon Judith Tizard 
: There are still six farms in Auckland Central though. 
Hon JIM ANDERTON 
: Now it is part of Auckland Central but then there were dairy farms down the road. People did not think milk came from the supermarket; they saw the dairy farm and orchards and they went and picked up their fruit in the summertime. So we knew where fruit came from we knew where agriculture was done we knew how cows were milked and we all had uncles cousins and aunties who lived on farms and whom we visited in the holidays. 
Those days are well and truly over. Basically we have to get a synergy between city dwellers and our urban communities because we are interdependent on each other. The urban communities have to succeed and so do the rural communities. I think one of the reasons that the Prime Minister has asked me to do the job is to get someone from the city who can actually talk to people from the country and to get some understanding between the two. I am very proud to do this job. I admit readily that I was very comfortable as the Minister for Economic Development and the Minister for Industry and Regional Development. I think I was making a reasonable fist of those portfolios and because I invented them in a sense I was very comfortable there. But the Prime Minister has taken me out of my comfort zone. She said: “I’ve got some news for you. You’re going to be the Minister of Agriculture the Minister of Fisheries the Minister of Forestry and the Minister for Biosecurity.” I said: “Run that past me again!”. But anyway there it is. The challenge is there. It is exciting. It is interesting to deal with new people whom one has not had to relate to before. 
I think we can all be proud of what we have achieved in the agricultural and horticultural community. We are world-class but we have to be creative and innovative. There is a new era of technology here. If one thinks of forestry one thinks of trees and what one can do to trees. But actually the new technology is fibre technology. People can grow soya beans in Brazil and make wood products out of those soya beans because they can rearrange the fibre. Basically this is the kind of challenge that our industries face at a primary level. We have to start thinking of materials of technology input and of high-class quality products with added value at the top end of the value market because that is where our future lies. So I look forward to the cooperation of parliamentarians in achieving those objectives. 
Report noted.