Robertson Grant: Border (Customs Excise and Tariff) Processing Bill — First Reading 
Robertson Grant: Border (Customs Excise and Tariff) Processing Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:658;Page:7126] 
GRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central) 
: 
 I rise to support the Border (Customs Excise and Tariff) Processing Bill. 
Paul Quinn 
: That’s enough. 
GRANT ROBERTSON 
: That is it? No it is not. It is an excellent bill because it introduces some new technology into the control of our borders. It will allow and facilitate for much easier movement between New Zealand and Australia. The SmartGate concept is one that I know some colleagues across the House might be a little scared of. Paul Quinn would not make it through a SmartGate any day. But I say to Mr Quinn that he does not have to worry; they will not be asking him any questions. He will just have to look in the cameras and he will be able to get through. I am sure that Mr Quinn will enjoy his trips to Australia all the more now that he can make it through with SmartGate. The bill that comes before us today does a lot to try to improve and facilitate people’s movement across the Tasman. 
I will pick up on one thing that Mr Hayes said around the issue of biosecurity and I do not think we should pass over so quickly the concerns that Kevin Hague and others have raised here. When New Zealanders travel overseas they like the fact that when they are travelling on a New Zealand passport they are able to move well and freely. Our passport is a document that is respected and has integrity. In turn when we come back to New Zealand we like the fact that we are able to move smoothly through. But we also like the fact that we have a pristine country. We also like the fact that we have flora and fauna that we are proud of. It attracts people to come to New Zealand. Anything we do—be it changes to customs or be it biosecurity changes—that appears to weaken that reputation is something we need to do with caution. When this bill comes to the Government Administration Committee I will certainly be seeking reassurances that anything that happens to it there will continue to protect the integrity of New Zealand’s borders. 
It is interesting for me that at a time when Government members have been standing up and saying proudly that this bill will help increase the protection of our borders and that it is an important part of increasing surveillance and of ensuring that we do things to cut into the scourge that is P we also know that the National Government took out $3.5 million from the border control budget this year. It took out $3.5 million. If we are really serious as a country about protecting our borders and if we are serious about cutting into the scourge of P then why would the Government cut out $3.5 million from border control? 
John Key was talking about these issues on  
Q+A 
 on Sunday. Paul Holmes in what was otherwise a fairly sycophantic interview asked him at the end about the fact that $3.5 million had been removed from the budget for border control. John Key’s response was: “Yeah well I mean we’re putting a lot of money into this now … I mean we’ve expected every government department to actually look for ways to have savings and I don’t think that should be mixed up with a message of getting tough on drugs.” 
Well I am sorry I say to Mr Key but if we are getting tough on P which is something that all members in the House support then the border is where we need to be getting tough on P. The border is where we need to be intercepting the ingredients that make up P. If we are cutting out money and if we are lowering the amount of security and decreasing the integrity of our border then we will not be able to make those cuts into the supply of P. It is all very well to talk about the across-the-counter medicines that people buy in pharmacies but a large quantity of those precursor ingredients are coming in across the border. We need to keep investing in our border control to make sure that we keep the scourge of P out of this country. I think it is a bit rich for Mr Key to be trumpeting that and talking about taking out that money. 
At the same time we have seen 50 staff taken out of Biosecurity New Zealand. I accept Mr Hayes’ point that this bill is largely about customs but if we look at the border in totality if we look at New Zealand’s presence at the border then removing 50 staff from Biosecurity New Zealand is not investing in it. If we look at places like Timaru and Nelson we will see that those ports will now be wondering whether there will be enough staff to deal with biosecurity emergencies. I ask whether we will be able to protect our border as we decrease the number of staff. 
One of the things this National Government has proudly said is that it is moving resources to the front line. That is what it is doing. It is taking them out of the back office. If we ask most New Zealanders what one of the fundamental front-line services that the Public Service provides in New Zealand is they will say it is the service at the border. It is biosecurity. It is border control. This Government has taken out $3.5 million from border control and it is cutting staff in Biosecurity New Zealand. The Government is not taking seriously the protection of our borders. That is not reducing back-office staff; that is reducing front-line services. The distinction between the front line and the back office is completely artificial anyway. But in this instance the Government is not even living up to its own rhetoric. 
In fact this bill is a good bill. I think that New Zealanders will know that when this bill passes it will protect and provide an assurance to them that our borders are protected. But the select committee will have a job to do in helping provide that reassurance and in making sure that New Zealanders know that their biosecurity and borders will be protected. 
I will speak briefly about the changes to the Tariff Act that come in under this bill. They are something that I support. I think that when we are making agreements about reductions in tariff rates in free-trade agreements it is useful and good to be able to do that in a simple and an efficient manner. But I also think that when we talk about these changes at the select committee it will be very useful to make sure that we find a way of communicating about these changes in a way that people understand. It is important for those who are involved in the affected industries to know about the reduction rates and to understand the impact on them when we are putting things through in legislation. Although I certainly support the efficiency and the streamlining in this bill I want to make sure that when we work on it at the select committee we are not taking information away from the public. I want to make sure that we are not creating a situation where the people who work in industries affected by tariff reductions do not know as much about these changes as they should. 
The rest of the bill deals with a number of enforcement matters and seizure and search responsibilities for customs officers. Again custom officers will now be placed under more pressure in their working lives. They will be finding it more and more difficult as staff around them are removed. 
Some of the work that has been put in brings a cost. The SmartGate for instance will cost $38 million. That is a large amount of expenditure and a good investment. I would ask the National Government what it thinks about investing in the people who work in those areas. What about investing in the customs officers and in those who work to protect our biosecurity? Over the National Government’s time in office we have consistently seen that it does not want to make that investment in people and border control is about people. 
One of the concerns that has been raised about the SmartGate idea was whether there will be any interaction between someone coming into New Zealand using the SmartGate system and an actual person. I am reassured by reading the bill and the explanatory note that there will be that interaction. There will be an opportunity for some interaction between someone coming into New Zealand and an actual person so that we can continue to protect our borders. Customs officers and Biosecurity New Zealand staff are the people whom the Government needs to invest in. They are the people who keep our borders strong. Technology is all well and good and it is an important part of facilitating movement and protecting our borders but it is the people who work in those organisations the hard-working public servants whom this Government should be investing in. 
In summary I support this bill. I look forward to it coming to Parliament’s all-powerful Government Administration Committee where we will look at it closely analyse it and ensure that it contributes to free movement between Australia and New Zealand and to the protection of our borders and our beautiful country. Thank you.