Ardern Shane: Meat Board Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Ardern Shane: Meat Board Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:630;Page:2365] 
SHANE ARDERN (National—Taranaki-King Country) 
: 
 I also rise in support of this bill going to the Primary Production Committee. It is important that that important select committee—the most powerful committee in Parliament I would suggest—look at the bill. But the question that remains of course is this: how come so soon after the legislation was passed in the first place we are back considering these amendments? I guess that in the fullness of time the officials may be able to explain that but what I think it demonstrates—and the Minister certainly touched on it in his opening comments—is that things are not always as black and white as some of our officials and some members of Parliament might think. So I say to the select committee of which I am not a member—I was at one stage but not at the moment—that it should make sure that it goes through the detail with a fine-tooth comb so that we are not back here having to amend it again. 
It is important that Meat and Wool New Zealand—the Meat Board as has been referred to in the bill—has the ability to manage the quota. The reason for that is that we have markets overseas that have taken years to build up. The Minister of Agriculture noted in his comments how important those markets are to the social and economic well-being of New Zealand. I agree with him entirely and I thank him for his comments. In fact I was heartened to hear them from the new Minister. The Minister was of course in the Lange Government for a little while—the very Government that said this was a sunset industry and the sooner 8000 farmers walked off the land the better. So I was heartened to hear the Minister say—and it is obvious to anybody who spends more than 30 seconds studying these industries—how important they are to New Zealand. 
As the Minister said 87 percent of beef is exported as is 88 percent of lamb. That makes New Zealand unique. Nowhere else in the world would one find an economic producer of protein-based land-based products where the export content of what is produced is as high as that. In fact in most cases the exact opposite is the case. Mostly one finds that 80 percent 90 percent or up to 95 percent of what is produced in a country is consumed in that country whereas New Zealand has to go out into the world compete against huge multinationals and succeed. So I thank the Minister for the initiative of making sure that the quota management system is handled well. 
Not too many New Zealanders actually know what such industries do and what this industry is about. The New Zealand Meat Board—operational name Meat New Zealand—exists to further the interests of New Zealand’s 32000 meat producers. I got these figures from the parliamentary Bills Digest but I suspect that the figure of 32000 is too light. I suspect that it is bringing meat producers down to trade names rather than individual farmers or producers. I suspect that the figure is too light but I am able to be challenged on it. I know that there are 70000-odd farmers in New Zealand and I also know that the dairy industry which one would not consider to be linked with this is 40 percent of the meat industry. So it is a meat producer even though its main income would be registered as being dairy-product producers. So I challenge that figure. I have no facts or basis on which to challenge it I just suspect that it is wrong. 
The board is there to manage the interests of those producers and it is funded through a levy on stock slaughter. Its main purpose is to develop and enhance market access. That is its main purpose. I have to say having just attended a recent meeting with a large number of my colleagues—in fact I think 32 National caucus members attended the meeting which was a very good meeting—I was heartened to see just how strong the leadership in that industry is and where it is going. 
Russell Fairbrother 
: Where were the rest? 
SHANE ARDERN 
: The member opposite interjects. We have heard a lot recently about National members interjecting during question time. I know that some people are annoyed by how many National members are here now. I hasten to add that it particularly annoys the Rt Hon Winston Peters who I know can only ever round up two or three of his own team to support him at any one time. But the fact is that there are 48 National members here and 32 of them were at the meat and wool meeting just recently. So I say to the member that we are 100 percent behind this industry and this process. This industry produces $4.6 billion and we overlook that. This industry is often dusted off as some insignificant group of cow cockies from the back of the hills somewhere. 
R Doug Woolerton 
: How much? 
SHANE ARDERN 
: It is $4.6 billion. The Minister said that this economy is very dependent—I would go so far as to say almost totally dependent—on these land-based industries. So we cannot place too much emphasis on the importance of this kind of legislation. The New Zealand Meat Board has a particular role in the regulation of market access and that is what this amendment is about. We cannot have ambiguity in the market about who controls the quota. We must have tradability and we must have the right regulations in place. I was heartened to hear the chair of the select committee the Hon David Carter a very good colleague and obviously the Opposition spokesman on agriculture say it is hugely important to make sure that that tradability is maintained. I agree with him entirely. 
It is also important however to make sure that the quality of the product exported to those markets measures up to the standard that is put forward in the quota access. If we do not have those quality assurances in place markets can be damaged beyond repair very quickly. Any ambiguity in respect of what meat should be exported to a tariff market and how and when is absolutely untenable. If that exists in our Act then we need to fix it. I am sure the select committee will carry out its work very diligently and the Minister will pass the bill through the House. 
Can I finish by saying that this industry is built on the backs of hard-working mum and dad farmers out there in New Zealand. It is not built on the backs of bureaucrats or officials or structures based in Wellington and we often forget that. We talk in lofty language about the significance of some of these structures but we forget that we need the producers out there battling away every day to make sure that the product—which it is undisputed is the best in the world—is produced efficiently. 
That I guess is why it is so important for the Government to provide the right infrastructure for those people to get on with it. In recent times we have seen a Government that has started to take us down the track of losing sight of those basic fundamentals. The fact that we must have competitive access to markets is part of it. It is absolutely important. But the other side of the equation is that we must have a Government framework in place that allows those hard-working farmers in New Zealand who produce this product—the most efficient farmers in the world; the people who produce the best product in the world—to get on with that job and not be tied up in all sorts of brain-dead regulation that spills out of this place and throws up a roadblock in their faces. 
One of the things that we learn about this industry the moment we look at it is that it has gone from being a bulk commodity almost 19th century industry—part of the first Industrial Revolution as it were—to being a very high-tech value-added industry. I say to the House today: watch this space. If members have a look at some of the new developments within the meat industry and at some of the new initiatives around wool development pasture development and meat development they will find that this industry has a strong future. And it will still be a leading industry in this country for three four or five generations despite the fact that most of the Government’s energy—and I am not talking just about the current Government; it is not a political statement—goes into putting all sorts of barriers in its place. I say to the Government that it should take a look at what makes this industry efficient get out of its road and let the industry get on with it.