Burns Brendon: Biosecurity Law Reform Bill — First Reading 
Burns Brendon: Biosecurity Law Reform Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:669;Page:16206] 
BRENDON BURNS (Labour—Christchurch Central) 
: 
 I will try to take most of my time allocated tonight to do justice to this important bill the Biosecurity Law Reform Bill unlike the two Government members who have spoken including the Minister for Biosecurity who did not take his full opportunity to outline why he wants to see this important legislation passed after scrutiny by the Primary Production Committee. I applaud the seriousness that the bill applies to the considerable threats of incursion and pests to our nation. We make our living as a nation off our land; therefore the risks that are posed by pests that come in are enormous. 
Labour is very much in support of this bill. Biosecurity threats and technologies have changed significantly in the past 10 years or so and we acknowledge that the legislation needs to be overhauled to take account of technology and reflect those changes. We support the change in the bill to broaden the scope of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry’s biosecurity powers which will hopefully allow it to operate more efficiently and effectively. Those are issues to be supported applauded and aerated in this House by members who will take the time available to Parliament to discuss them unlike the two Government members who have spoken to date. 
We support this bill and we acknowledge of course that the most recent incursion we have faced is the  
Pseudomonas syringae 
 pv.  
Actinidiae 
 (Psa) outbreak in the kiwifruit industry. For those members who are not aware the kiwifruit industry is a nearly $1 billion export industry for this nation. It is a huge export earner for New Zealand and it is truly important. I want to acknowledge the great response that the Government has led along with the kiwifruit industry. 
The previous Labour Government took biosecurity seriously. We more than doubled the vote from about $94 million in 1999 to $187 million by 2008. However given the reliance on it we have as an export-led nation it has been disappointing to see this Government make cuts to biosecurity staff. I have spoken informally to biosecurity staff who tell me that the cuts have meant that they are letting through people whom they would not normally be letting through. Staff are standing there at times overloaded with work as planes come through in a bundle and they are letting through people whom they know in their heart of hearts should be put through more scrutiny and checks. When there is only a handful of staff working and a couple of jumbos are coming through they can do only what they can do. Therefore we are already taking risks with our biosecurity. It is very fraught. We have an open border. We receive enormous tonnages of imports. They come into the country in containers only a handful of which are inspected. We have to do things on a threat-risk basis and that is understood but the thin green line has got thinner as a result of this Government and it should be taking account of the risks it is posing on us as a nation. 
I am well aware of the threats that are posed. I was living in Marlborough when the Ross River virus was discovered in a tiny part of Marlborough the Vernon Lagoons area which is one of the most beautiful parts of that beautiful province. An enormous project went in to capture the salt marsh mosquitoes that carried the Ross River virus. That effort was great to see because the risks were very considerable and it would have been a disaster if that virus had taken hold in the rather balmy climate of Marlborough out there on the Vernon Lagoons. Some years earlier we saw a spraying regime across Auckland to combat the painted apple moth and that was highly appropriate. 
I note the investment that the Government has made in countering the Psa threat in the kiwifruit industry with $25 million almost instantly found to deal with the issue. I have to say that the response was very well coordinated. It was swift and it was well communicated. I can only ask David Carter the Minister of Agriculture to please take over the earthquake recovery portfolio as well because we need that sort of leadership. At the moment things are going backwards in Christchurch in respect of the response of the Government to the earthquake. We saw a pitiful package last week. We wish we could get a $25 million package announced to assist Christchurch businesses which are reeling from the onslaught of the earthquake and its impacts. The ramifications of that lack of funding will be with us for a long long time especially if nothing is done in the interim as Christmas approaches. I note though that it is great to see $25 million allocated to fight Psa. It is good to see a Minister providing leadership getting the industry together and getting a commitment from the industry to put together a $50 million package. But I contrast that with the $100000 in real cash found for the Christchurch business community where jobs are bleeding because of the impact of the quake and the drop in turnover. Businesses are often experiencing half the turnover that they had before the 7.1 magnitude quake on 4 September. I just wish David Carter could be in charge of that portfolio. I am sure he could stand up in Cabinet for the people of Canterbury as a Canterbury-based Minister and MP and tell Cabinet that it needs to do more. I hope he continues to do that. I hope he does not let Bill English take hold with his very trenchant approach to these issues and his fear for precedent because that will see hundreds more jobs lost in the Christchurch business community and hundreds more businesses having to close for want of a small and judicious intervention by the Government at the time of a once-in-750-year event. 
The response to the Psa issue has been great. It is what we need when we are a nation that earns its living from exports like kiwifruit. The risks of incursions are enormous. If something took hold in say the dairy industry we would be talking about a risk to an $11 billion industry and the sheepmeat industry is worth a couple of billion dollars so there are huge risks posed. That is why we are supporting this legislation. It is appropriate and timely. We have concerns about the cuts to biosecurity staffing but there is still the opportunity for the Minister to make some amends in respect of that. Obviously the package that he has brought together for the Psa outbreak is an example of the leadership he can provide when he puts his mind to it talks to his Cabinet colleagues and extracts $25 million. That is the sort of response demanded for biosecurity and I say to him that he needs to reconsider the cuts to biosecurity staffing. 
This bill will not cause much controversy. It has been progressed in an appropriate fashion. Even if we are sitting at quarter past nine on a Friday night under urgency at least the Minister has had the decency to refer the bill to the Primary Production Committee at the conclusion of the first reading debate. That is what we want to see. The select committee process provides the opportunity for input and expertise to be aerated round a committee table. We want to hear from people involved in the biosecurity industry from people who are making their living from primary production and who are most at risk if we have a serious biosecurity incursion. 
We acknowledge the need for change. Technology is moving rapidly. We are seeing things such as SmartGate coming through which relies on our good friends in Australia to do some of the border checks for us. Everybody wants to be able to move more rapidly across borders which is a given but risks come with that and we need better biosecurity screening and operations. 
In conclusion I come back to Psa. The potential cost of Psa was around $75 million to the industry. The Government has indicated that it is at its point of finality with the offer of $25 million and that is fair enough. The industry is obviously coming to the party. It is doing its best but it is clear that we are facing very real threats to our kiwifruit industry in various parts of the country most particularly in the Bay of Plenty but in other parts as well. The cost to New Zealand underscores why biosecurity is so important to our nation. We make our living off the land. We are a nation with a reputation for being clean and green. Obviously people who are buying our produce expect it to be premium. That means that it cannot be tainted by disease or by anything else and that is why Labour is supporting the bill. 
We commend the Minister for bringing it to Parliament and allowing the bill to be sent to the select committee unlike other legislation we have been debating this evening. That is the appropriate process and the Minister earns brownie points in our view. 
I finally say that I wish the Minister would talk to his colleague the Minister for Earthquake Recovery in order to win for the Canterbury business community the amount of money earmarked to fight Psa.