O'Connor Damien: Health and Safety Reform Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeO'Connor Damien: Health and Safety Reform Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 25 August 2015. Volume:708;Page:6133. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon DAMIEN O’CONNOR (Labour—West Coast - Tasman): I appreciate the opportunity to speak once again on the Health and Safety Reform Bill. I have gone through to what I suppose is a very very important part of this bill and it relates to changes to the hazardous substances and new organisms legislation. Again not having the full background of it I am skipping through this trying to bring myself up to speed. Clause 140—no it is not clause 140; it is clause 289 replacing section 140 as set out in Supplementary Order Paper 108 and it is in regard to regulations. There will be some probably in the Green Party who might want to prick their ears up on this. Section 140(1) states: “Subject to section 141 the Governor-General may from time to time by Order in Council make regulations for 1 or more of the following purposes: (a) prescribing organisms as genetically modified organisms for the purposes of this Act: (b) prescribing organisms as organisms that are not genetically modified organisms for the purpose of this Act:”. The point is that in dealing with health and safety this legislation deals with the Environmental Protection Authority and the hazardous substances and new organisms legislation—some of which I am quite familiar with.As a boysenberry grower I deal with quite a few chemicals that I have to say I do not like touching. I use gloves and all the methods advised to make sure that I do not come into contact with them and nor would anyone who would be working with me or for me. That is a high-risk situation because although there are warnings on the packages—which you cannot see I have to say unless you have got a microscope—for the most part most of them are known as eco-toxic and are things that you want to avoid all contact with. Whether or not we like it they are part of the horticultural system and if used correctly they are fine. But there is a risk in working with them. This piece of the legislation deals with that by trying to minimise the potential harm from that contact. But in clause 289 which amends section 140 the replaced regulations—these are the regulations that refer directly to GMOs. I have to say that there is a move afoot across the country across the economy down that pathway and the new National Environmental Standard for Plantation Forestry includes reference to GM trees—presuming they are trees anyway—and certainly imposes restrictions on local councils many of which are up in arms about it. The point is that there is a move to push down that pathway. In the absence of any comprehensive discussion I think it is irresponsible absolutely.What we have got here is the passage of legislation under health and safety—and we know the connection with Pike River—but very quietly we have got reference here to another significant area of importance for our economy and that is GMOs. The fact that our economy relies on a biological production system means that if we do move into this area then there are significant implications for companies for sectors and for the country in terms of our branding. I want to ask the Minister in the chair Simon Bridges whether he can give an assurance that we are not moving one step further down the path to easing access for GMOs. Alongside that open exposure through the National Environmental Standard for Plantation Forestry there is a lot of subversive and not so subversive activity from the likes of Federated Farmers and others that are saying that actually genetic engineering is quite a complex science which I agree with and can partly understand. Actually GM is not GM in many cases. The point is that there are those who think that is going to be the salvation of the primary production sector and they are pushing more down that path without any consideration for the branding issues—Hon Member: Replace Steffan.Hon DAMIEN O’CONNOR: That person over there should know as a farmer. He should know better. We do not want to end up in a cul-de-sac where our high-quality safe high-value production systems are undermined by what may be a perception of us changing to a new production system. The point is that the regulations as amended as referred to and as prescribed here in this legislation may be—I do not know—opening the door to GM and GMOs.