Prosser Richard: Biosecurity Law Reform Bill — Third Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Prosser Richard: Biosecurity Law Reform Bill — Third Reading 
[Sitting date: 12 September 2012. Volume:683;Page:5186. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
RICHARD PROSSER (NZ First) 
: 
 I am pleased to rise on behalf of New Zealand First to take a call on this the third reading the final act we could say of the great theatre by which the Biosecurity Law Reform Bill becomes law. New Zealand First is opposed to the passage of this legislation not because we do not agree with the stated aims of the bill—we do agree with them; there is fine intention within this bill—and not because there are not good aspects to the bill or there are not good elements within it. The extension of New Zealand’s biosecurity laws and the ability to enforce them to the 200-mile exclusive economic zone is a good thing. Measures that will prevent unwanted organisms from entering our waters via the ballast tanks carried by cargo ships are a good thing. 
The omnibus provisions of the bill bring several other Acts of this Parliament as they relate to biosecurity under one umbrella. That is a good thing. But there are exasperating elements to this bill also. I am prompted to bring to the attention of the House the North American groundhog Marmotamonax. It is a squirrel-like creature a ground squirrel a rodent of the family Sciuridae. It is known in some parts of the United States as variously the land beaver the woodchuck and on occasion even the whistle-pig—the whistle-pig. I am given cause to wonder whether if one gives a whistle to a pig it is still a pig. But I digress—I digress perhaps just a little. 
I mentioned Marmotamonax because it is the inspiration for a film. It is a funny film starring Bill Murray who is a funny man. 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: What’s it called? 
RICHARD PROSSER 
:  
Groundhog Day 
. In the film which strangely enough is entitled  
Groundhog Day 
 Bill Murray’s character relives the same day over and over. It is this that reminds me of this bill. Bill Murray is a funny man; he is a funny Bill. This bill is not a funny bill. It is not funny because just like in the film when we look at this bill we are faced with the same sense of déjà vu as Bill Murray’s character experiences throughout the story. Here we go again; that is the theme of the movie. Once again this Government this National Government has correctly identified a problem—indeed a set of problems—and then gone about creating a bill that will entirely fail to properly address them. All too often this Government does this. This Government creates legislation that takes entirely the opposite approach to problems from that which is required in order to solve them. It is the same thing and it keeps happening over and over. We are trapped in our own Groundhog Day with this bill and others of this Government’s creation. 
There are other eerie parallels between the groundhog and this bill. Its various names have a curious relevance to aspects of this bill and to the way in which they will impact on New Zealand’s biosecurity. Members may think I am taking a rather odd approach to this third reading by drawing numerous references to a rather odd North American rodent. I believe it is wholly appropriate because it is reflective of this Government’s rather odd approach to biosecurity which is at the heart of this bill’s failings. 
I reiterate and we are happy to acknowledge that there are good things within this bill and its stated intent is a good one. But at the heart of its failings is the moving of the focus of biosecurity away from direct inspections and towards a targeted regime based on risk assessment and profiling. New Zealand First regards this approach as deeply flawed. We know from experience—everyone in New Zealand knows from experience—that with the best will in the world we cannot stop every last pest or disease or other biosecurity threat from crossing our borders. But with proper vigilance we can minimise the threat of an incursion. Even with full inspection we know that something going wrong is a case of not if but of when and without proper vigilance and full inspection it becomes a case of not when but of how soon. If we drop our guard in this ill-advised manner something will go wrong and something will get in—than that there is nothing more certain. 
How does this relate to the groundhog? Well as I mentioned before one of its names is woodchuck. There is a well-known tongue-twister that asks the question how much wood a woodchuck could chuck under various circumstances. The answer in New Zealand’s case might very well be none at all if our lax approach to biosecurity means that we let in a moth or a virus that devastates our pine forests. Without trees there will be no wood for the woodchuck to chuck no revenue from forestry and no jobs for forestry workers either. Do we really want to open ourselves up to that sort of risk? 
The whistle-pig is another name for the groundhog. And whistling forlornly for non-existent pigs might be all that remains for our pork industry if inadequate safeguards at the border mean that we allow the porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus to enter and establish itself here. The land beaver—I do not even wish to begin drawing comparisons between this bill and any sort of beaver however appropriate the connotation might be. Suffice to say in moving the focus of biosecurity inspection in the way that this bill would bring about we are virtually admitting that not only do we expect the horse to bolt but that we are leaving the stable door open to make its escape even easier. And shifting responsibility for compliance from Government to industry is yet another example of the type of self-regulation that we have seen so often and that we know does not work. We have had leaky buildings we have had Pike River and now this bill will deliver us foot and mouth disease—not if but when. You can take that to the bank. 
New Zealand First supports calls from across the primary production sector for the 100 percent inspection of all goods crossing the border and for the screening of all passengers regardless of who they are and where they are travelling from. We salute the Government’s intentions where this bill is concerned and we really wish it had been able to get it right. But just like Groundhog Day here we go again: it has not. This is a deficient bill that will cost New Zealand dearly and irrevocably and New Zealand First does not support it. Thank you.