Smith Nick: Biosecurity Law Reform Bill — Third Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Smith Nick: Biosecurity Law Reform Bill — Third Reading 
[Sitting date: 12 September 2012. Volume:683;Page:5179. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson) 
: 
 This Biosecurity Law Reform Bill is the most substantive change in New Zealand biosecurity laws for more than 15 years. I want to challenge the member who has just spoken opposite Damien O’Connor who has beaten his chest around how important biosecurity is. Why is it that in the three terms—9 years—of a Labour Government we did not have any substantive law reform in the very area of biosecurity? Let us just go through the track record of this Government in biosecurity. In our very first year in Government National brought in laws that more than doubled the fines for those who breach our biosecurity laws and this evening in the House after a comprehensive review of our biosecurity laws we have this very substantive bill that improves our laws. For all the huff and the puff from Damien O’Connor did you not hear the words “But we’re going to support the bill.”? He knows in his heart of hearts that this is good law that will help protect New Zealand’s vital exporting industries. 
I want to challenge the member on a few aspects of his speech. The first is that like every Labour spokesperson he promises more spending. It does not matter whether it is education health an extra TV channel putting the school age down to 4 or more money for ACC every single one of Labour’s spokespeople is hopping around the country promising more money. And the simple question is that the challenge that faces every Western Government is where the money is coming from. I have a very specific question that Damien O’Connor needs to answer given that rave: how much extra money per year will Labour commit to biosecurity? 
Hon Damien O’Connor 
: You wait and see. 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: Oh you wait and see! You wait and see! What sort of weasel words—what sort of weasel words! I have a copy here of Labour’s biosecurity policy at the last election. You would have thought that after all the rhetoric from Mr O’Connor that Labour would have had some hard dollars on the table and that it felt so strongly that it had a certain amount of extra money that it was going to put into biosecurity. Do you know what? Not one specific dollar amount was committed by Mr O’Connor in respect of biosecurity. 
The member Mr O’Connor has said that the fruit fly incident that occurred in Avondale shows our biosecurity systems are not working. He is wrong. Exactly the opposite is true—exactly the opposite is true. The fact that our monitoring systems picked it up and the way in which the systems respond are things that we should salute and we should be proud of the response that occurred and the way that incident was dealt with. Then we had another one of these Labour attempts to sort of rewrite the history. Let me go through. He said that this is just like what occurred in the building and mining industry regulatory setting. Well I would love to quote in terms of the building law reform Mr O’Connor the words of George Hawkins one of his colleagues. Do you know what George Hawkins said? He said “How dare the National Party claim credit for the building liberalisation that occurred in 1991.” He said that all of this is Labour’s work. 
Hon Damien O’Connor 
: Tongue in cheek. 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: Well no actually. For the record Mr O’Connor the building law reform was introduced by the fourth Labour Government. The bill was introduced by Margaret Austin and actually it had its third reading only after the change of Government. 
I have a question on mining. Mr O’Connor wants to highlight the mining. I have a simple question for him: during his 9 years in Government from 1999 to 2008 if he was so wise about the deficiencies in the mining industry regulations why did Labour do absolutely nothing for 9 years? You know what really is the issue with Mr O’Connor? Mr O’Connor will play petty politics over the 29 tragic dead miners on the West Coast just in the same way as he will play petty politics with the issue of biosecurity rather than actually making sure that this country has the right systems and the right rules around protecting our vital industries. 
I want to also talk about the issue of SmartGate. It is interesting Mr O’Connor that we have just had a review of SmartGate. That member repeatedly stood up in the House and said that SmartGate would increase the biosecurity risk for New Zealand. Do you know what the review shows? Actually they are getting more and improving New Zealand’s biosecurity. It is delivering better biosecurity results in the audit that has just been published 3 weeks ago showing again the success of this Government. 
The last point I want to challenge Mr O’Connor and the Labour Party on is this playing politics. Whether it be in terms of the capsicums the pork the honey or the tomato we on this side of the House say that our biosecurity decisions need to be made on the basis of good risk management and science not politics—not politics. You see we have had an age-old argument—90 years going—in respect of access for apples into Australia. We are a country that makes our living out of exporting biological products in markets overseas and we cannot have a double standard saying in one breath that when Australians come to make decisions about New Zealand apples and managing the risk of fire blight we want an independent science-based approach and then when it comes to New Zealand on the other foot and it comes to issues of pork or capsicums or honey or any other we are going to take a political and not a science-based approach. 
Hon Damien O’Connor 
: It’s not based on science Nick. 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: I say to Mr O’Connor that what he is effectively arguing is that the decisions about those biosecurity and import standards should be made by political representatives rather than by scientists and we on this side of the House as a party that stands for trade and for earning this country’s living from biological products say that our biosecurity systems need to be first class and our decisions about import standards need to be based on science not politics. That is what this bill is about. This Government is proud of the work that we are doing in biosecurity. It is part of what we are doing to build a better future for this country.