Browning Steffan: Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBrowning Steffan: Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 13 October 2015. Volume:709;Page:7175. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]STEFFAN BROWNING (Green): We were getting our numbers mixed up there. We thought that speech was No. four. It was all of about 4 seconds long. I am pleased to be getting up to speak to the Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Amendment Bill particularly because I want to expose the issue that this bill and these amendments are not needed.This bill is effectively one of the Trans-Pacific Partnership bills. [Interruption] Howl you may. This is another one just like the biologics one that has been leaked. The text has been leaked. That covers patents through to 8 years and so does this and there is no getting away from it that it is all tied up. This is about hiding the truth about the parts the compounds inside agricultural compounds and veterinary medicines.This isabout putting more chemicals more carcinogens more endocrine disruptors more neurotoxins into the environment and into the public’s food chain without their being able to look to see what is in there. It is already a problem. And I reflect on something I have talked about in this House before—the herbicide-tolerant swedes. If I want to find out or try to find out what that seed is treated with—it has got two fungicides and an insecticide—I cannot find out. I am pretty sure that the insecticide will be a neonicotinoid—they do not deny that but they will not tell us either. Why should the public not be able to know that?I will pull out some statistics—the Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Act came into force a good few years ago now. It basically started in 2001 and here we are in 2015. So we slice it down the middle and we can see when the Government came in. Before National came in there were 906 new products granted approval through that time. Since National has come in there have been 1100—there have been another couple of hundred over the 7 years. We will look at how many chemicals have been withdrawn. So in that first period 687 chemicals were withdrawn as 906 came in. Of course there were quite a few in there to start with—that were put into the Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Register. Since 2008 once National got in only 239 have been withdrawn—1100 new ones only 239 out.Out of the total number of chemicals withdrawn since this Act came in 14 years ago only a quarter of them have come out under National and you are saying that you need more—Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: I am not saying anything.STEFFAN BROWNING: Sorry not the Deputy Speaker. The Government is saying and I am looking over here at the Government members that these companies—these traders of carcinogens neurotoxins endocrine disruptors and others—need to have more protection that we need more of them in this country. Too many of my friends are dying from cancer. Which one of you Government members over there has not had a relative or a friend come down with cancer in the last 12 months? It did not used to be like that—it did not used to be like that. It is time we got rid of a lot of these chemicals and went to genuinely sustainable methods of production.This morning a number of us were at the global goals for sustainable development panel and goal No. 12 is responsible consumption and production. There is nothing responsible about bringing in more and more unsustainable pesticides—nothing. Yes I will speak about glyphosate. Glyphosate probably causes cancer. It is a carcinogen. The World Health Organization (WHO) has come out saying that it is a probable carcinogen but it is a carcinogen and Monsanto knew that from the start. Glyphosate is genotoxic at sublethal concentrations. It is a hormone-damaging endocrine disruptor at very low levels—causing infertility birth defects: negative impacts on the reproductive system.Be embarrassed in the wine industry. If I fly over Marlborough at the moment it will be a bit like 2007 when I measured accurately that 70 percent of the vineyard area including headlands was herbicided. Oh and they call it “sustainable” winegrowing. I will carry on. What that herbicide does is it contributes to digestive illness gut disruption and nutrient deficiencies. It can exert worrying effects on antibiotics. It is neurotoxic at sublethal concentrations. Organ concerns—it damages kidneys; beneficial insect populations including honey bees get knocked around. The formulation which of course is secret and is intended to be even more secret with this Act is even more toxic than the principal ingredient glyphosate. The inerts are not inert.And groundwater? When have we been testing the groundwater for glyphosate? When have we been testing the milk in a way that can actually measure glyphosate? It does not happen. Is there a need for more herbicides? Well in that time in the first 7 years of this Act until National got in there were 194 new formulations granted—194. Since National has come in 269 effectively 270 different formulations of herbicides have been granted. There is no need to be ramping this up or making this more secret. Insecticides—84 previously granted. There have been 125 since National has come in.Oh National needs to help its big mates in corporate agribusiness in the chemical industry. And then National will help its mates and it will cover up—you watch—when the bills comes through around the medicines and it will hide that information too. So on the one hand the Government turns around and is helping to make people sick and then it is going to protect the interests of a similar industry—quite often related—and make it a monopoly and difficult for consumers for those needing health remedies by covering up the information and giving them patents rights in terms of medicines.It is time that this country that is so soaking in pesticides one of the highest users per capita in the world actually set some pesticide reduction targets; not carried on pouring in more and more formulations. Another one that we are looking at closely of course are the neo-nicotinoid pesticides—those insecticides that are so insidious that are throughout the environment which we know affect bees. We need these things re-assessed and we need them withdrawn and moved to really sustainable production methods.We will be opposing this bill. There is a lot of concerning stuff. I am looking forward to dealing with it at the select committee and we will be bringing up some of these issues and I will be looking to the Government to actually back off on some of the things it is asking for. Thank you.