Utikere TangiTANGI UTIKERE (Labour—Palmerston North): Thank you Mr Speaker. It's a pleasure to rise and take a call on members' day on the Biosecurity (Information for Incoming Passengers) Amendment Bill. I have to say that this is the first time that I've had an opportunity to speak on this bill and I'm really excited. I think everyone's excited when it comes to members' day because who knows! It's often luck of the draw where it starts and it's often luck of the draw where it ends. But I'm excited to be able to make a contribution on this bill in the House this evening. I want to acknowledge my good colleague the member for Whanganui Steph Lewis who has shepherded this bill through the parliamentary process. I know another colleague that has just had her bill go through Rachel Boyack and myself—I've had the privilege of being able to shepherd a bill through this House and I know what it's like to be able to clear all of those hurdles and so I want to acknowledge the work that Steph Lewis has done in bringing this to the House. I think that Steph Lewis may actually have been on track to have been the first of the class of 2020 Labour but for maternity leave; it meant that we are going to hopefully to pass the bill this evening. I know that she is a hard-working member of Parliament for the mighty Whanganui. And she has seen a gap she has seen an issue and she has decided that she is going to do something about it and that's what constituents in the fine city and area of Whanganui expect of their hard-working MP. I know this is just the beginning for her because there will be more bills that the member for Whanganui Steph Lewis will bring to this House upon consecutive three-year consecutive three-year consecutive-and-then-some—as the wonderful member for Whanganui.This particular bill is one that will amend the Biosecurity Act of 1993. It's an Act that has kept this country safe for nearly 30 years in terms of protecting our natural environment and what is so special and particular about Aotearoa New Zealand. It applies specifically to large commercial craft as Mr van de Molen has already identified this evening and it also will ensure that there is a level of information about the I guess dynamic nature of New Zealand's biodiversity needs to the craft's passengers. I note that the Primary Production Committee throughout this process had looked at the issue of changing the definition. So it wasn't just everyone who was on-board the craft but it was actually going to be specified to passengers rather than crew being included in that but also that the responsibility lies with the person who effectively is in charge of the craft. That makes sense; if we think about it many of us if not all who fly around from A to B from time to time all know that it's the captain who gives instructions about putting on the seatbelts the captain who gives instructions about the flight about to land and all of those sorts of things. So it's appropriate that the responsibility does lie with the person who is in charge of the craft. I have to say that I think actually many people around New Zealand would have thought that this was already a law that this was something that was expected of all craft that were entering New Zealand. So I certainly was surprised to learn that it wasn't that perhaps actually the approach up to now has been one that has been optional rather than one that's required by law. So I do thank the member for bringing this to the Parliament.There are a number of changes that the select committee did suggest and it's pleasing to see that that has come to third reading having survived the committee of the whole House process. I think I join with others in acknowledging that those suggested changes are obviously designed to make the bill more workable which is certainly important. But I also note that the recommendations were also recommended by the Primary Production Committee in a unanimous fashion. I think it's a real credit to the committee and no doubt the leadership of our colleague Jo Luxton but also a credit to the member who is responsible for this bill that she has been able to work extremely hard to ensure that there is cross-party support for this and to iron out some of those issues that have cropped up along the way. That's certainly what we all expect of successful approaches to select committees. One of the changes that is evident in the bill as it stands currently is the change to the date within which the bill would come into force. I understand previously it was suggested that it would be the day after Royal assent but clearly the bill as it stands currently includes something quite different and that is that it would be either on the date that's specified in an Order in Council or 12 months after the bill receives Royal assent whichever comes first. So the latest that this bill could come into play is effectively a 12-month period. That is obviously going to be welcomed. And the rationale as I understand for that is it gives officials it gives the ministry it gives stakeholders and others that are involved—whether it be airlines whether it be cruise liners whether it be other craft operators; but also those that are potentially enforcing this—to have a bit of time to ensure that the issues can be worked through. And the bill and what is expected—or the Act as it will be—is able to be implemented in a way that is able to ensure that it is successful. So I think members certainly on this side of the House would agree I'm sure that that's a sensible suggestion that the select committee have put forward.The other interesting thing is the way in which this information related to New Zealand's biodiversity is provided to passengers is going to be left to secondary legislation or to the director-general and others to work through as part of regulations rather than specified in the Act proper. I think in the current environment and context it's really important to ensure that there is some flexibility and agility to provide different opportunities for craft operators to be able to provide that. So the bill itself is able to deliver on that by ensuring that there is some flexibility and that things can change and it's much easier as we know to be able to do that through regulations than it is to put it in primary legislation because that would require a further passage through this House to change. The interesting thing and Mr van de Molen did touch on this is the nature of some of the craft that come into New Zealand is quite different. The list that I've seen are things like private planes air ambulances cargo ships fishing vessels defence force aircraft the list can go on. So the ability to tie within the definition of the Act a specific definition so that it captures those that are of a suitable size—so it won't capture all craft or vessels or aircraft that come into New Zealand but it will capture a significant number for whom the risk would be it's suggested I think much higher. Where there is a higher volume of passengers then clearly the risk is much higher to the country; whereas if it's a smaller number of passengers the level of engagement with border officials is at a level where there is still a risk but the risk can be mitigated by mere numbers. It is much lower as I understand it. Just to conclude I again want to acknowledge the hard work of my colleague Steph Lewis in bringing this bill to the House. I think many of us watch Border Security and Border Control" and all of those sorts of things—Steph Lewis: Border Patrol.TANGI UTIKERE: —Border Patrol thank you. And we often see the decisions that some people make and I'm sure many of us think "Is that really possible? Is it really that you can get to the point at New Zealand's border and you don't realise what is in your bag or your luggage?" What this member's bill does is it provides some certainty that the information the level of information that will be provided to those who are travelling to New Zealand before they arrive in New Zealand—so not at the point of arrival but before they arrive in New Zealand—is at a level that nobody can have excuses as to not knowing what is acceptable and what is not. So I again congratulate the member and I commend this bill to the House."