O'Connor DamienNATIONAL ANIMAL IDENTIFICATION AND TRACING AMENDMENT BILL (NO 2)Second ReadingHon DAMIEN O'CONNOR (Minister for Biosecurity): I move That the National Animal Identification and Tracing Amendment Bill (No 2) be now read a second time.A well-functioning animal tracing system is vital for our biosecurity and to protect our most valuable exporters: our primary sector. This is the second reading. Ironically the first reading of this bill was in 2012. It has taken some time I guess to come back and upgrade this bill—or the Act I should say.This bill addresses the issues found during the response to Mycoplasma bovis and the recommendations from an industry-led National Animal Tracing and Identification (NAIT) review. It addresses the inaction of the previous Government in ignoring enforcement and ignoring the promotion and utilisation of NAIT in the way it was intended. As I said—Hon David Bennett: That's rubbish. That's lies.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): Order! I heard a word that was very unparliamentary. The honourable member that said it should stand withdraw and apologise.Hon David Bennett: I withdraw and apologise.Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR: As I said this Act was first put in place in 2012. We've had to move forward—learning from the lessons of M. bovis—to make the changes in this piece of legislation. I acknowledge the valuable input from submitters and the support the bill received from key industry stakeholders. I would like to take the opportunity to thank the Primary Production Committee for their work on the bill. Mycoplasma bovis was the first real test of NAIT traceability and the scheme was found wanting. Mycoplasma bovis will cost New Zealand almost $1 billion to eradicate and that cost would have been considerably less if the NAIT scheme had been working well.The bill package contains a number of provisions. The package amends the NAIT Act and five sets of regulations. The changes ensure the framework underpinning the scheme is fit for the future. They tighten the focus on the basics for good tracing. The amendments support the operational changes being done by NAIT Ltd the organisation running the scheme.The changes that we are making include a number of things. Firstly the NAIT number on a tag is specific to a given location. That is not the current situation. This is fundamental to getting better traceability. Persons in charge of animals—or PICAs as they are known—will no longer be able to put tags issued for one location on to tags at a different location.The second thing we're doing: we're encouraging better compliance. Most people across New Zealand would say that if there's a law then there should be compliance with that law. The reality for NAIT is that was very very poor. By now no farmer should be in any doubt that everyone needs to do their part and comply with their obligations under the NAIT scheme and legislation. We are making it easier for the location history of animals to be provided to potential buyers—an issue that was raised during Mycoplasma bovis and the complications with the Privacy Act although I personally have some doubt as to its interpretation on certain matters. We are increasing penalties for non-compliance. I make no apology for stepping up the sanctions on people who continue to not meet their NAIT obligations. The cost and consequences of that behaviour fall on everybody else—the taxpayer and every other farmer across New Zealand.Thirdly we're dealing with the performance of the NAIT organisation. NAIT Ltd is a private company with significant regulatory functions. The bill puts in place some standard ministerial oversight provisions for the NAIT organisation to address identified weaknesses. I have to say that I was very frustrated when I exposed some of the weaknesses but was unable to intervene directly as any normal Minister would be given the responsibility that I had to ensure full traceability across the agricultural system. That will now be addressed through these changes. There is a graduated set of tools to ensure that the company that runs the scheme stays on track. The Minister will be able to notify the board of priorities and expectations related to scheme functions and is able to issue a direction if needed. These are very sensible improvements and I think any Minister with a portfolio responsibility would understand the value in having an ability to give clear guidance.Other enactments in the legislation: the changes tighten the exemption for sending untagged animals going to meatworks. The direct safety of an individual farmer will be the only justification allowed. This is where sometimes an animal may go on to a truck and be sent to a works penalty paid but it's been a simple opt out for farmers when they haven't had to tag animals. The expectation is that animals should be tagged before any movement on or off a farm and the exemption that was allowed for what were unsafe-to-tag animals will now be changed to ensure that that exemption is not abused.The current voluntary annual reporting of other animal species on farms will now be mandatory so that in disease management particularly in the terrible and hopefully unlikely event that we would ever have foot-and-mouth disease clearly other species such as sheep and goats that may contribute to the spread of foot-and-mouth disease—currently there's no obligation to tag—at least now we will have to have notification of the presence of those animals on farm.The select committee has recommended that the bill package proceeds with a few revisions and I support their recommended changes. The committee recommends that the Act does not confirm that the core data within the NAIT system is the property of the Crown. So the Act will remain silent on this. However other provisions ensure that the core data set is protected by the Crown on behalf of all systems users. I have to say that personally I have some unease with the paranoia that was spoken of at select committee about the Crown taking ownership of the database should that NAIT private organisation ever be sold. As we saw with the previous Government they tended to sell anything they could lay their hands on and that did expose databases like this to being passed into private hands. Our provisions that would have ensured control in the hands of the Crown are now left silent and it will be upon a future Government to ensure that the database of farmers' information is in fact protected.As I said before the committee agreed to change the terminology of the existing exemption for moving untagged animals to meatworks if they are impracticable to tag. That was the exemption. Sadly we know that some farmers have been misusing this exemption choosing to interpret impracticable" as being inconvenient for them. The term "unsafe" that will be introduced now focuses this exemption on its primary purpose which is to manage dangerous animals and protect the health and safety of farmers. The NAIT scheme's been in place for seven years. Farmers should have the right equipment and the processes to tag their stock because otherwise they can't move them anywhere other than to the meatworks. That's why we considered that this exemption which was always a temporary measure could be removed in five years' time. So that's a clear warning to farmers that you need practical equipment. The committee has recommended of course that instead there is a review of whether the exemption is still needed five years after this legislation is passed.One of the other issues here: good tracing relies on all animals being tagged. One key checkpoint for biosecurity is when an animal is moved off farm. PICAs are currently responsible for making sure untagged and unregistered animals are not moved. So the provisions in the legislation put in place a more robust scheme—with clear obligations and clear responsibility on PICAs—and there was some discussion around transport companies and whether they should be responsible. What we have is a requirement that transport operators receive an assurance that the animals have been tagged or notification has occurred.These changes and the amendments agreed by the committee reflected a balanced consideration of the comments received from submitters. I commend the National Animal Identification and Tracing Amendment Bill (No 2) to the House."