Goldsmith Paul: Standards and Accreditation Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeGoldsmith Paul: Standards and Accreditation Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 19 May 2015. Volume:705;Page:3402. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH (Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs): I move That the Standards and Accreditation Bill be now read a second time. The purpose of the bill is to ensure New Zealand’s standards and conformance system is viable and well functioning and meets the needs of business regulators and consumers into the foreseeable future. The bill achieves this by putting in place new arrangements for New Zealand standards development and approval and by updating the institutional arrangements for the Testing Laboratory Registration Council to better reflect the nature of its functions. The bill brings together the law relating to standards and accreditation of conformity assessment bodies and it repeals and replaces the Standards Act 1988 and the Testing Laboratory Registration Act 1972.The new arrangements for standards include the establishment of the New Zealand Standards Approval Board and the New Zealand Standards Executive. The board will approve New Zealand standards and membership of standards development committees and advise the responsible Minister on the currency of New Zealand standards the priority areas for the development of New Zealand standards and the review of existing New Zealand standards. The Standards Executive will be an independent statutory officer located in the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment. The Standards Executive will be responsible for standards development and will assume responsibility for New Zealand’s membership of the International Organization for Standardization and the International Electrotechnical Commission. These new arrangements will replace the Standards Council which will be disestablished.I have heard the concerns regarding the independence of the standards system. Stakeholders can be assured that this has been a key consideration in the development of the new arrangements. The Standards Approval Board and the Standards Executive are statutorily independent. Neither is subject to the direction of Ministers. The board will be guided by decision-making criteria in the legislation when considering proposed standards and proposed membership of standards development committees. The Standards Executive will be required by the legislation to continue the practice of developing standards by using independent committees of technical experts approved by the board reflecting an expectation of international and domestic standards communities. I am confident that these and other measures will continue to support the independence of the standards system. I also note that there are a number of different institutional models for standards around the world including where the standards development function is located within the Government agency.The current cost recovery model for standards will be strengthened by this bill. The bill provides a framework to allow the Standards Executive to enter into arrangements that cover the life cycle of standards balancing initial development and approval costs with ongoing costs for maintenance and access. This will provide a sustainable financial footing for the standards system—a key driver for change.In relation to accreditation the bill updates the provisions of the Testing Laboratory Registration Act 1972 to reflect the contemporary nature of the functions of the Testing Laboratory Registration Council that relate to accreditation of testing and inspection services. The bill will also rename the council as the Accreditation Council.I commend the Commerce Committee for producing useful commentary in only 4 months and I thank those who submitted on the bill for their contribution. The committee’s analysis of submissions has resulted in a number of sensible recommendations. I am pleased to say that the bill has been amended to provide a more flexible pragmatic and proportional approach to managing actual and perceived conflicts of interest for standards development committee members.As I mentioned the standards will continue to be developed using the committees of technical experts and the representatives of consumer and worker organisations. It is important that any conflicts of interest are identified and managed to ensure transparency and confidence in the standards development process. The bill now strikes a more appropriate balance between ensuring people with the right knowledge and expertise can participate in standards development committees and avoiding capture by a particular interest. The definition of “personally interested” has been altered to narrow the range of interests that it captures. Second potential standards development committee members must disclose any interests to the Standards Executive before their membership is proposed to the Standards Approval Board and on an ongoing basis if interests arise while they are on standards development committees. Third the bill is now explicit that a chairman with statutory functions will be appointed for each standards development committee. The chairperson must not be personally interested.A new provision gives the chairperson a role in managing conflicts of interest in consultation with the Standards Executive. The Standards Executive will support the chairperson in managing the conflict of interest. The register of interests relating to a standards development committee will be available to the Standards Approval Board when it is considering a draft standard for approval. This allows the board to have regard to the nature and extent of the interests when approving or declining a proposal.Another aspect I would like to highlight is the addition of provisions to clarify that New Zealand will continue to participate in standards development committees run by other standards organisations such as Standards Australia. This has always been the intention but the bill now makes it clear that the Standards Executive will propose New Zealand nominees for international and joint standards development committees whom the board will approve or decline.Some changes were also made to clarify the existence of copyright in standards which was a particular concern of some stakeholders. Other changes to the bill are minor and technical in nature and include the deletion of definitions no longer required.In conclusion I once again thank the members of the Commerce Committee and those who provided submissions. I reiterate my view that the bill is stronger for having been through this process and is more able to provide a sustainable responsive standards and conformance system that can facilitate trade provide a platform for productivity and innovation and contribute to health and safety outcomes. I commend this bill to the House.