Heatley Phil: Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (Stockholm Convention) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Heatley Phil: Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (Stockholm Convention) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:609;Page:6996] 
PHIL HEATLEY (NZ National—Whangarei) 
: I would like to address the matter of the schedules and could I cast members’ minds back to the debate we had earlier regarding the Stockholm convention. Members will recall that we talked about it in the debate on the Imports and Exports (Restrictions) Amendment Bill. We also talked about what is in Schedule 1AA “Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants”. It is good to see that arise in this bill the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (Stockholm Convention) Amendment Bill. Members will recall that at that time we put up an argument about what is listed in the schedule in the other bill and why it was not listed in the schedules of that bill. I am delighted to see that the Stockholm convention is listed as part of the schedules of this particular bill. I remember a clause in the other bill that Judith Collins requested to be removed because it stated that when conventions like the Stockholm convention were passed in future they would automatically become law without this Parliament addressing it and without even Orders in Council. We put that concern forward. 
I say that because Schedule 1AA “Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants” states things like “Recognizing that persistent organic pollutants possess toxic properties … Aware of the health concerns … Acknowledging that the Arctic ecosystems … Conscious of the need … Mindful of decision … Recalling the pertinent provisions” and on it goes: “Reaffirming” “Encouraging” “Recognizing” “Determined”. All those words are highly emotive stating activity things like “Recognizing” “Aware of” “Acknowledging” “Conscious of” and “Mindful”. 
The point made by Judith Collins was that we are not mindful we are not aware we are not recognising we are not conscious of we cannot recall we are not reaffirming we cannot encourage we are not determined to and we have not agreed to. Any convention might be passed in the future so why would one secure it in legislation for ever without members of Parliament being able to scrutinise it; and without even an Order in Council? That is what the member of Parliament for Clevedon Judith Collins was referring to. That was her concern and those schedules only build on her argument. 
I put it to the Chair and to the new Minister in the chair that the schedules simply back up what Judith Collins was putting forward to this Committee. The Minister in the chair should be mindful of that. I would like him to acknowledge that to be aware of that recognise that and recall that. I would like him to encourage that to be determined and to agree with that. I hope that the Minister takes a call and acknowledges Judith Collins’ forethought in regard to the schedules. 
I am intrigued with schedule 1AA “Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants” which talks about the Rotterdam convention and makes reference to it. It is a fascinating convention. Many members here would have lain awake at night reading about that one. We know what it says—members should know what it says. That convention was passed on 11 September 1998. Members did not have the luxury of my wisdom in this House at that time but they have it now. That convention was passed on 11 September 1998. However the Stockholm convention refers to the Rotterdam one and we have a bit of background on that. I have information on that that I have shared. However we do not have any information on the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal—that is referred to in this schedule. Does any member here recall the details of the Basel convention? Mr Prebble does not recall that. Does any member here recall the Rio declaration which has also been referred to?