King Colin: Dairy Industry Restructuring Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
King Colin: Dairy Industry Restructuring Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:644;Page:13752] 
COLIN KING (National—Kaikoura) 
: 
 It is a pleasure to speak in the Committee stage of the Dairy Industry Restructuring Amendment Bill (No 2) and I take great confidence and comfort from the speakers who have spoken previously. I want to deal with two areas one of which is the integrity that is required around a quota system. It is very very important because we mention the farmer a lot—the producer of milk solids and suchlike—but the quota is owned by the Crown and is part of the process of our getting free trade or privileged access to various markets. On that basis whatever a quota management scheme is about it has to have integrity. 
When we look at new section 29A inserted by clause 14 we understand just how structured and how principled this process is. That cannot be overlaboured because we are an export nation; we export 85 percent of what we produce in this country. It is very difficult when we hear the speaker from New Zealand First talking about Fortress New Zealand and that kind of mentality because in actual fact we have to continually argue for the removal of barriers. Quota access by its very nature is privileged nation access. It is a very fine line. Effectively in the world of trade New Zealand runs two arguments and it is very important that we are seen to be very thorough and have quota management processes that have integrity. 
When we go through section 29A to section 29J we find that the chief executive has some wide sweeping powers to be able to go in and check the data the record-keeping of anybody who has access to that export market. We see that at the end of the day if any of those laws and regulations that underpin the integrity of the quota system are breached the fines are quite substantial. We see that the fines have been extended under this bill up to $200000 with a further fine not exceeding $10000 for every day or part of a day during which an offence is continued. So there is a high level of accountability. That is good to see and I myself think it has to be there because from time to time people from the dairy industry have been dragged before various countries’ officials to explain their actions. That sometimes can have an effect upon other quota markets that are held. When we look at the dairy industry we see that this quota is not large as a proportion of the whole of the dairy industry—it is rather small. But in the sheepmeat industry a very large part of the access to Europe is under quota. So I am pleased and I take great comfort from the way that this bill progressed through the select committee. I am comfortable that it is fine. 
The second thing I want to talk about is the Livestock Improvement Corporation’s core database. This issue is something we need to get sorted because in itself it can actually be a barrier to improving the productivity of this nation—and not only within the dairy industry. As there is more demand for our products to be scrutinised we will have to get into areas such as animal identification and the Livestock Improvement Corporation’s database is a vehicle whereby we can identify the very cuts of meat that people are consuming. The Livestock Improvement Corporation has raised an issue here—we see that it came from AmBreed New Zealand originally which is a competitor within the market—and it is important to realise that there are other valuable aspects that the Livestock Improvement Corporation’s animal database can contribute to. As a nation we will continue to export a lot of what we produce and when we consider that 85 percent of what we produce overall goes overseas it is important that we do it well. 
I commend the select committee for processing this legislation in a timely fashion. This issue is something that those in rural areas have been very concerned about since 2001.