O'Connor Damien: National Animal Identification and Tracing Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
O'Connor Damien: National Animal Identification and Tracing Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 07 February 2012. Volume:677;Page:121. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon DAMIEN O’CONNOR (Labour—West Coast - Tasman) 
: 
 Thank you Mr Chair. I appreciate your guidance there.  
I just start by going back. We have started the new Parliament. The National Animal Identification and Tracing Bill has been hanging around for some time—in fact since 2004 when the previous Labour Government in its wisdom saw the need to introduce a tracing system that would not put us at the leading edge of national animal management but would actually just bring us up to what has been occurring in a number of other countries for a number of years. We pride ourselves on being a nation of good managers of agriculture livestock animal welfare issues and of course biosecurity.  
Unfortunately at the time when Labour introduced this legislation there was quite a vicious campaign launched by Federated Farmers against this initiative. I have to get that on record because as a result of that it is now 2012 some 8 years on and we are passing this bill through Parliament.  
Labour supports the bill because we know it is necessary. We need to know where animals are whom they have been sold to and what should occur in the terrible and unlikely event of an outbreak of foot-and-mouth for example. We now trace our animals for tuberculosis and many of the dairy animals are traced for breeding purposes but we do not have one comprehensive scheme. This bill will move us down that track for cattle and for deer.  
Just to reiterate the countries that currently have such a scheme in place are Australia the United Kingdom Canada the USA South Korea Japan the EU Argentina and Brazil. We are right behind all our competitors and in a world where consumers are demanding to know where their food comes from and how it was produced and want an assurance that it can be traced in the event of some contamination or in the event of some disease—we are not there yet—the sooner we pass this through the House the better. The National Government sat around on its hands I would suggest. The Primary Production Committee dealt with this bill as quickly as we could but it has been sitting around and it is important that we move on.  
The select committee dealt with a number of issues in its consideration and I am sure the chairman will speak at some stage. There were issues because of that 8-year period. Technology moves on very very quickly. What was in my view a political stance by Federated Farmers to animal tracing in 2004—to object on the basis that technology was unsure and all the rest of it—was just an excuse at that point. There were however legitimate questions around the technology that should be used moving forward to make sure we did not impose a system on farmers processors and saleyards and then realise 2 or 3 years down the track that the technology was obsolete. I think the select committee did its very best in this area.  
The issue comes down to low frequency versus high frequency. Both frequencies are used on the farm—less so in processing factories. Labour has supported and supports a bill that opens the door for both technologies but we hope that there will be clear alignment of them as this moves forward because as soon as we can tell where all the beef cattle the dairy cattle and the deer in this country are then we will be better off and more secure in terms of potential biosecurity threats.  
I go back to the bill. I am sure the Minister for Primary Industries will get up and answer a few queries on technical points. One of the questions that we have to ask of the new organisation is about its ability to communicate with and connect to lifestyle farmers. As I say farmers have reluctantly taken this on board. I think they now appreciate the benefit of this. Lifestyle farmers—people with few animals—may not understand the threat that they if they stay outside the system may pose to our whole production systems in agriculture. I implore the officials to take on board some guidance about how to get out there and how to do some public relations. We are told that there will be a whole lot of brochures and a whole lot of marketing. We just have to make sure that that marketing is well targeted and that it is effective in getting out to those lifestyle farmers. 
 Can I say given that we have a broad-ranging debate that there have been assets sale here as well—and I know that the Minister smirks. In fact the Government in its enthusiasm for asset sales actually sold off last year a company that is likely to benefit—and good luck to them—from the implementation of National Animal Identification and Tracing (NAIT). Sirtrack was a subsidiary of the Crown research institute Landcare Research and was sold to a Canadian company. It has actually developed technology that will be of huge benefit to the system when it is implemented in this country. All I say on that—because I know you are allowing a wide-ranging debate Mr Chairman—is that if we see the stupidity of asset sales continue then once again we will miss out on potential benefits as we move into the future.  
But I come back to NAIT. I just say that the question of sheep is one that I think should be raised. The sheep farmers out there will be panicking and saying “Oh not us! Why should we be involved?”. I am not quite sure what a ewe was worth in 2004—that is a female sheep not “you” Mr Chairman because we are not allowed to say that of course. A ewe was probably worth maybe $30 to $40. Now they are looking at $150 to $200 for a good ewe. I think that sheep farmers might now understand the potential benefits of having their animals included in a traceability scheme so that if we have an outbreak we can move quickly protect our export industry and know where each and every one of the sheep are. At the moment sheep are outside the scheme and the Minister may want to get up and explain whether he intends to move in that direction and include sheep. At the moment it is cattle and deer and I think that is a positive step forward.  
I am not going to say anything more other than that Labour supports this bill. It has been a long time in coming and this will be a very important step forward for the credibility the integrity and the value of the New Zealand agricultural production systems.