Roy Eric: Biosecurity and Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Legislation Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Roy Eric: Biosecurity and Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Legislation Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:646;Page:15202] 
ERIC ROY (National—Invercargill) 
: 
 I will take a brief call on Part 1. I resisted the urge to climb into the debate occurring around new clause 2A which I decided was probably better left unmassaged shall we say. First I acknowledge the Minister Jim Anderton for his involvement right throughout this—there was a briefing for our caucus members who were interested prior to us getting into this—and for the way in which he accepted what was a unanimous series of decisions from the Primary Production Committee. I just say to the Minister rather wryly that quite a bit of wisdom and practical knowledge resides on that select committee and had he consulted us on the fisheries amendment legislation a little earlier we might well have come to a much easier road for him to pursue. We will just park that matter but the point has to be made. 
I am pretty happy with the result we have. It was as I say a unanimous decision and I share the concerns of those people who say that we certainly have a blockage. For those people who are concerned about what we have done we have actually reverted to the practice since the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act 1996 but we have put in a layer of review for where there is concern. We have put in a level that gives an opportunity for those with serious concerns to have the decision scientifically peer reviewed by whoever is available internationally. I actually think we have strengthened the process and I do not understand the argument proffered previously in the debate—leaving aside the conspiracy stuff—that this has detracted from what we have done. 
I think that the review panel has two impacts. It has a salutary impact upon those in the biosecurity section of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry who are tasked to make the decisions because they know that if they do something that does not look right or about which there is concern there will be an immediate response and the likelihood of peer review. That is one thing. Then for those who actually sit out there—and I made some comments in the debate on the second reading about this not being a get-home-free card for those people who want to use this as a non-tariff barrier—there are some quite prescriptive things that I will read into the record of the Committee just to make sure that that is not abused. The umbrella organisation has a mechanism that saves the litigious process of going as far as the Court of Appeal when the best science can actually make that assessment. So I think that is very positive. 
I think there were two issues that the select committee needed to deal with. One issue was having this review process in place and the other issue was the retrospectivity around the bee situation. I think they have had their day in the sun—their expression was quite clear. Again I think there is further clarity on new clause 7A which I hope actually takes away all those emails from people saying “by the enactment” and “the 90 days” and all that chronological stuff which they did not understand even though we assured them it was the case—but there are not that many of them. Clause 7A talks about bee products being a special case and that is going to be an issue that is given consideration. I am pleased to hear that that work is under way. 
I make just one point—because I do not understand the science of this and in making this point I hope that it is considered by the review panel—and that is the issue around  
Paenibacillus alvei  
being a blockage or taking out the marker of American Foul Brood which is another alvei process. I think that needs consideration by that review panel because I do not know whether that is good or whether it is bad or whether it is a justifiable means to stop the importation of honey. But that is an issue in my view that the industry needs to give some consideration to. So I raise that in the hope that that is an issue that will be in the report. 
The Biosecurity and Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Legislation Amendment Bill is a good piece of work. I reiterate again the wisdom of the select committee in finding in very short time very practical solutions and for adding value to a bill that had to be passed. National supports the bill.