Clark DavidPLANT VARIETY RIGHTS BILLFirst ReadingHon Dr DAVID CLARK (Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs): I present a legislative statement on the Plant Variety Rights Bill. ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jenny Salesa): That legislative statement is published under the authority of the House and can be found on the Parliament website.Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: I move That the Plant Variety Rights Bill be now read a first time. I nominate the Economic Development Science and Innovation Committee to consider the bill.Hon Simon Bridges: Why?Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: That is the right committee to consider the bill I say to the member. The plant variety rights (PVR) issue has been with us for some time. It addresses problems that haven't been solved since we first had this legislation on plant variety rights in New Zealand in 1973. This bill enables us to meet our obligations under the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership our free-trade agreement that is aiming at being progressive. It facilitates economic recovery and at the same time it respects indigenous rights and takes a partnership approach recognising the rights of Māori in the development of our indigenous species and the kaitiaki relationships that they have.This bill gives certainty to business. It hits a sweet spot that enables progressive trade. It is inclusive. It's the best of both worlds: indigenous rights and commercial returns for intellectual property (IP) development. This bill and those that support it will find themselves on the right side of history supporting those who develop intellectual property and growing New Zealand's GDP. To oppose it of course would be to oppose progressive free trade and to undermine both Māori and the business community. I would not expect any member in this House to oppose and undermine business and prosperity for the future of our country. I would not expect any member in this House to oppose this bill and undermine indigenous rights. So with this bill we move things forward.It is interesting that first these issues came in a really substantive form with the Wai 262 claim in 1991 and the review of the Plant Variety Rights Act in 1987 began the job of aligning New Zealand's plant variety Act's regime with the International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV) 91 about which I will say a little more. Plant variety rights make a valuable contribution to the New Zealand economy underpinning many advances in the agricultural horticultural and ornamental sectors. By encouraging the development and distribution of new plant varieties farmers and growers benefit from high-yielding or disease-resistant crops and consumers benefit from a greater variety of high-quality produce that meets new and modern needs. New varieties of kiwifruit apples and hops along with our world-leading ryegrasses are all examples of innovation brought about by the granting of plant variety rights.While on the whole the new plant varieties innovation system is in reasonable health breeders and growers are pointing to an uncertain future if our rules are not brought up to date with modern standards. These standards are set out in the most recent international agreement for plant variety rights settled upon in 1991 and known as UPOV 91. The Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership requires us to align our law with this UPOV framework but New Zealand currently with the existing regime is trapped in 1978. The current law put simply is not compliant with our obligations under the Treaty of Waitangi.So as I've mentioned previously the Wai 262 report concluded that kaitiaki relationships with taonga species are entitled to a reasonable degree of protection. The tribunal noted that some plant species can be classified taonga and Māori as kaitiaki of course then have a connection with them. As a result the report said there should be a mandate to refuse a PVR grant if kaitiaki relationships are affected and called for the establishment of a Māori advisory committee to provide advice to the commissioner on plant variety rights.The report was the starting point and there was then a good degree of consultation. It was listened to the wider concerns of Māori during the engagement and the review process and as a result the bill does extend further than that Wai 262 report in some areas. For example if work includes the use of plants that may be taonga like some indigenous plant species breeders are encouraged to identify and engage with kaitiaki early prior to submitting a PVR application and the bill will establish a Māori plant varieties committee with genuine—Hon Simon Bridges: There's no life without plants.Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: —decision-making power to help protect those kaitiaki relationships.Hon Simon Bridges: Photosynthesis.Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: Now all applications—ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jenny Salesa): Order! Mr Simon Bridges.Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: He needs some light as his interjections suggest! He needs to grow. He needs water. He needs light.All applications involving indigenous plant species and a small number of species that were brought on the migrating waka are covered by this committee and its oversight and any species concerning their use must be considered by that committee. Now if the impact of the development of the plants impacts on the kaitiaki relationship it may well not proceed as an application.We do want to modernise the Plant Variety Rights Bill so that it's finally consistent with international best practice in IP rights as laid down in the well-known UPOV 91. This is long overdue. Giving effect to UPOV 91 will strengthen breeders' rights to better reflect the realities of modern plant breeding. It will help stimulate innovation in the sector much as when plant variety rights protections were first introduced in the 1970s to encourage a rose grower to come to New Zealand as it happens to develop rose plants here. We want our businesses to have their intellectual property protected. We want to have reasonable concern to the rights of those with kaitiaki relationships. So I expect that these IP rights and the protection of them will bring benefits to New Zealand and our society as a whole.The bill does find the right balance. Farmers will still be able to save seed to plant for next season's crop. Breeders will still be able to build on existing innovation to create new varieties and home gardeners will still be free to grow new varieties for themselves. I'm aware there are many who would have liked us to have gone further. I think this bill is something to be celebrated tackling a problem that has been sitting there since the 1970s that has had challenges through the 1990s—the Wai 262 that came around and was discussed in the 2000s at some length—and a problem that has not been able to be solved by a succession of Governments.Here we have as a result of in part the progression of the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership—and I do want to congratulate the Hon David Parker for his work in this area previously. As a result of that work we found a way through that supports indigenous rights in New Zealand that brings prosperity with free trade and as I said at the outset that brings the best of both worlds. It will support our industries with the protection of intellectual property. It will support Māori and indigenous interests and those who support the bill will find themselves on the right side of history. Those who don't will find businesses questioning them as to why they are not bringing intellectual property rights into the 21st century and why they are not willing to protect and engage the kaitiaki of this land and ensure that indigenous rights are also respected. I commend this bill to the House.