Hutchison Paul: Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (Approvals and Enforcement) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Hutchison Paul: Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (Approvals and Enforcement) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:628;Page:831] 
Dr PAUL HUTCHISON (National—Port Waikato) 
: 
 Part 2 of the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (Approvals and Enforcement) Amendment Bill is indeed the nub of the bill. The group standards issue is the one that should be focused on most carefully because—as the member from Horowhenua Nathan Guy pointed out so ably—in many respects this is a very new situation for New Zealand. I note that both in the explanatory note and in the very good submission of the Sustainability Council the point is made that we should learn by overseas experience regarding the group standards situation. In fact one of the points that the Sustainability Council made was that the  
Environmental Risk Management Authority 
 can leverage off the work of overseas regulators to a greater degree than is currently envisaged so that standards can be linked directly to those set by the European Commission. New Zealand can therefore progressively acquire the standards used in its largest export market for food products. 
 I have some reservations about that in some respects because the European Commission exacts some very very tough requirements on those countries that export to it. But I think we should at least make sure that we are consistent with the Australian regulations and experience in that respect. I do not believe that the Labour Government has looked into the synergies with Australia to the depth that it should have. 
I also wanted to point out the comments made by the New Zealand Association for Animal Health and Crop Protection regarding group standards. It made the point that although it is generally supportive of the group standards initiative it notes that pesticides and veterinary medicines because of their proprietary nature and composition complexity do not readily lend themselves to this proposal. I would like the Minister in the chair David Benson-Pope to take a call and respond to that concern of the Association for Animal Health and Crop Protection. 
It also said that in new section 96A “Purpose of Part” it believes that such a group of hazardous substances should be of a similar nature and type and have similar circumstances of use. I note that the select committee has quite rightly and with the support of National responded to that so that the section states: “The purpose of this Part is to enable the Authority to issue amend and revoke standards … for groups of hazardous substances … that have a similar nature are of a similar type or have similar circumstances of use so that the risks of the grouped hazardous substances can be effectively managed by 1 set of conditions.” 
So here is Her Majesty’s most loyal Opposition responding to the thoughts of industries and those involved in the technical aspects of the industry which has sadly been one of the things the Labour Government has lacked in the response to the technical consequences of this important bill. 
I want to make a comment regarding new section 96D “When group standards may be issued or amended”. Once again that is one of the areas where there is great concern. The section states: “(1) Before issuing or amending group standards under section 96C the Authority must—(a) in the case of any hazardous substance … be satisfied that issuing or amending … group standards is a more efficient and effective way of managing the risks of all the hazardous substances in the identified group than the approval process under Part 5; and (ab) in the case of any hazardous substance to which section 96C(1A)(b) applies be satisfied that issuing or amending … group standards is a more efficient and effective way of managing the risks of all the hazardous substances in the identified group;”.