O'Connor Damien: Customs and Excise (Joint Border Management Information Sharing and Other Matters) Amendment Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
O'Connor Damien: Customs and Excise (Joint Border Management Information Sharing and Other Matters) Amendment Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:677;Page:466] 
Hon DAMIEN O’CONNOR (Labour—West Coast - Tasman) 
: 
 I stand up unashamedly as the biosecurity spokesman for Labour. Although we have indicated our support for the Customs and Excise (Joint Border Management Information Sharing and Other Matters) Amendment Bill can I say I raise some serious questions. National members will laugh about it because they are the party that has slashed biosecurity funding.  
If this is a SmartGate then I will take us back 100 years to when farmers invented the Taranaki gate. I am sure they considered it smart as well but now we need not a Taranaki gate; we need a safe door—that is not one that is locked permanently but one that is opened when people meet the requirements and know the code. What is happening here today every day in this country is that we have a Taranaki gate for biosecurity when we need a safe door. At no time in this country’s history has biosecurity and the threat of an incursion been greater. We have more people and more goods coming over our border every day than ever before. This Government thinks a smart gate is a Taranaki gate.  
I have to say that this bill as has been specified by the Minister of Customs and others attempts to do information sharing. A great idea—I cannot argue with that. The issue is what is happening in front-line biosecurity as both agencies—the Customs Service and MAF Biosecurity—have been moving in this direction. This programme has been around for a wee while and I have colleagues who may talk about that.  
What has been happening? Take for example Auckland International Airport—Auckland biosecurity staff. “Government has not hired any front-line staff for at least 3 years at Auckland Airport.” It goes by many names: sinking ceiling cost cutting attrition. People have been pregnant they have left they have retired and they have been on their OE but not one of them has been replaced at Auckland Airport. Is that a smart gate? No way. I feel very reluctant to offer support for this bill when the National Government has taken resources from front-line biosecurity people and placed them into one of Mr Williamson’s little technology projects.  
Well we can make progress through information sharing; there is no doubt about that. But we have claims that if you have an Australian or New Zealand passport you can virtually import anything into this country without challenge. Can I say that there have been—and you see them occasionally if you travel the borders—dogs. In fact this bill says it is illegal to harm a customs dog or biosecurity dog—a great move. How many of them are there? How much work are they doing? How much protection are they offering us? I put to you from firsthand information that I have received that the dogs cover about 1 hour a day of a 24-hour operation—1 hour per day. There are some more dogs being trained that is true but what happens is that they take the dogs from the airport to the port or the mailroom and they shift them around. Mr Williamson is smiling because all the reports he gets from all his managers say it is all fine it is all OK they are covering it all off.  
When front-line biosecurity staff are alarmed they are stressed. Those people who are truly committed to border protection see people walking through—in fact having their passports stamped to walk straight through without any checks at our airports. Now Mr Williamson is aware of this because he has been given this information. I do not know what he is doing about this. He is proceeding with the bill because he thinks that sharing information on computers—and to be fair to him he has been a consistent advocate for computers and technology; I acknowledge that. I am slowly catching up myself. But that is no replacement for the front-line protection that we need in this country every single day.  
There is a view among biosecurity staff that the next Minister in charge of biosecurity will soon be responding to the next incursion—imminent and inevitable. That is what they think because they are unable to carry out the duties that they know are necessary at the front-line borders be it at the port or be it at the airports. We are covering the whole thing— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: No no let me just respond because I am on my feet. I made the comment earlier that just because we are having a debate on all clauses and schedules of the bill it does not mean we talk about anything that is broadly under biosecurity. It should still pertain to the bill and this is an information-sharing bill. I ask the member to just contain himself. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I refer you to clause 7 “Regulations relating to entry of goods for export”. I would have thought that a regulation-making power in that area which gives specifications in that area would be about as broad as one could get as to the possibility of making regulations in this particular area. I would have thought that under that clause just about anything would go.  
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: No it will not. It has to pertain exactly to what that clause actually requires. It does not allow any kind of debate on biosecurity. It must pertain if the member is using that to clause 7. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I apologise and I regret the fact that I appear to be arguing with you. That clause is an amendable clause. That is a clause that is headed “Regulations relating to entry of goods for export”. The member could propose anything to do with goods coming in for the purpose of exporting them if he so chose. It is about as broad as you can get. In a Committee stage it does not have to be the exact words here; it can be any addition to that header that comes within the scope. My argument is that anything would come under that scope. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: It is about the amendment to the clause and I have made that point. 
Hon DAMIEN O’CONNOR 
: Thank you to my colleague; I think he is right. I will stick to the bill as always. The sharing of information about every aspect of biosecurity and customs is no doubt the objective of the Minister and that is why I make comment on this.  
Can I go to the issues of fines. Minimum fines are increased from $50 to $200 in the customs area. They have already been increased in the biosecurity area and I think it is important because there is uncertainty as to what this might do. Will it improve the situation or not? The firsthand evidence of what is happening in biosecurity now is that firstly passengers are not made aware of their rights. They simply get slapped with—for biosecurity purposes—a $400 fine and told that that is it: pay it or nothing. Of course they are not informed of their four options the problem being that the resources taken for the Joint Border Management System have been taken away from training for front-line biosecurity officers who have to impose these fines. That is what is going on here now. I have firsthand information regarding that. The Minister has firsthand information regarding that and I hope that he will take a call and hopefully deny that that is occurring. But I suggest that he probably is not in that situation.  
One other point that I think pertains to this legislation is the fact that MAF Biosecurity has moved to implement a new computer system. It is called MAFPAX I believe. It was imposed on staff who have effectively rejected the use of it because it takes too long and it is too complicated to record the data. If this is the data that is going to be shared but front-line officers do not have the training or do not have the time to put it in the system then what progress are we making? Are we just kidding ourselves here? Will the Minister Mr Williamson be able to say that we have got the most sophisticated information-sharing system in the world with the Minister responsible for biosecurity saying we need to gather $100 million to take on an incursion because we have had something slip through the border? That is the likely outcome of the current Government’s approach to biosecurity.  
We need an independent review of what has occurred in biosecurity over the last 3 years as we have moved toward the Joint Border Management System. I hope the Minister in the chair will get up and give us that assurance. If he will not then I have real trouble supporting this bill and the so-called progress we are making on border protection for this country. The Minister cannot deny claims and information given to him firsthand in the hope that it will go away and that officials will give him reassurance that all is hunky-dory. Well it is not. I have spoken to people from Christchurch who are in the same dilemma—that is staff working are unable to speak out publicly. They are committed to border security and biosecurity but they do not want to speak the truth for fear of losing their jobs.