Turei Metiria: Biosecurity and Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Legislation Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Turei Metiria: Biosecurity and Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Legislation Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:646;Page:15194] 
METIRIA TUREI (Green) 
: 
 Yes I was just about to clarify that. Thank you Madam Chair. I will address new clause 2A and the Supplementary Order Paper in the name of Tariana Turia on new clause 2A. The Green Party was interested in the way this bill progressed through the select committee and was dismayed as is obvious from my colleague Jeanette Fitzsimons’ second reading speech at the extent to which I think we were misled about the true intentions of this legislation. In our view it is designed to enable a much easier process for the recognition of an allowance of genetically engineered organisms into our country by providing that the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry can deal with those kinds of organisms where they are known as the bill sets out. 
I know we were told that this bill specifically excludes genetic organisms and that there is a provision that does that. We also know from previous drafts of the legislation and previous reports from officials that it was originally intended for genetically modified organisms to be included and to be allowed through this process. We have absolutely no faith at all that this process provides any protection for New Zealand for our biodiversity or for our primary sector to be protected from genetically modified incursions if the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry is the organisation that deals with these issues rather than the Environmental Risk Management Authority whose job it is to consider these things. 
The Supplementary Order Paper concerning new clause 2A proposes a sunset clause and we fully support that. We believe this legislation needs to be repealed at a defined date in the future so that issues raised that were not properly canvassed through the select committee process can be properly canvassed through that process. It is clear from the very short period of time that submitters had to make submissions on the bill that it would have been very difficult for them to canvass all of those issues particularly where there may have been some misinformation about the full intention or the likely intention of the ministry and the legislation. We agree that a sunset clause should be defined in the legislation so that it fails at a period in time and that there is a requirement for the ministry to deal properly with these issues. 
We are particularly concerned for the primary sector because they all oppose this legislation. It is not often that the Greens and the primary sector agree on significant issues like this but on this one we do. We fully support the primary sector’s concerns that if the ministry is left to deal with these organisms and to provide the proposals and processes to allow them into the country the sector will be at serious risk of organisms that are known to cause risks to it. 
Frankly it is very surprising to see both the National Party and the Labour Party supporting legislation that will put our primary sector at risk because this is what this legislation will do. Unless there is a clearly defined mechanism for ensuring this legislation fails at some point in the future so that the work is done to provide the proper protections for the primary sector so that it is not subject to the kinds of risks that this legislation will allow we are putting one of our major export earners at serious risk. 
The Greens have concerns about other areas to do with the primary sector as is well known. We do not want to see its destruction through poor environmental management—which is always our concern—or through incursions of organisms through a process that fails to provide a proper precautionary system or to properly assess the risks of those organisms to that sector. It is amazing that National and Labour will be prepared to put that sector at such risk with such little consideration for what is some kind of turf war maybe or some strange turf thing going on between the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry and the Environmental Risk Management Authority. Why would the two older parties in this Parliament be prepared to put our primary sector at such risk?