O'Connor Damien: Food Bill — First Reading 
O'Connor Damien: Food Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:665;Page:12625] 
Hon DAMIEN O’CONNOR (Labour) 
: 
 The Food Bill is indeed substantive legislation—370 pages makes for quite a lot of reading. That is as it should be because the production of food is the key driver for New Zealand’s economic wealth and will be for many years into the future. It is appropriate that we have a bill that has been in the development stage for many years. The bill was initiated by the previous Labour Government and it has finally been brought to the House. 
Most people have said they welcome the bill’s introduction. Labour will support it because it does a number of good things in terms of alignment and improvement in the way that food is regulated in this country. 
I will go back one step and explain why it is so important that we get this right. The Federated Farmers conference in Invercargill not so long ago heard from a number of speakers that the opportunities for this country in the future in terms of food production are huge. We have a wonderful future in selling into the growing markets of China and India. These countries are growing in affluence and people want better-quality food they want to know where the food comes from and they need to know it is safe. So the opportunities are unlimited but we have to do it right. 
The issue is not just about exports. We need to have a best-standards regime in New Zealand—international standards that is—because it is very hard to tell the world that we export the best-quality food but do not have the best-quality food within our own shores. That is the reality. Many people in the agriculture and food industry will tell members that when manufacturing for export the standards are higher than the standards necessary for domestic consumption—and that is not the way it should continue. 
I guess that the misalignments and the number of pieces of legislation governing food production have been in part responsible for that. The previous Government saw the wisdom in bringing all food production under one piece of legislation. There was extensive consultation around the industry and for the most part the industry fully supports this door-stopper of a bill. I am sure that you Mr Assistant Speaker Barker like many members of Parliament will have read it. I am sure the Minister has read it from front to back and twice over. 
Brand New Zealand must be upheld; the integrity and safety of our food production must be absolute. No one can have any doubt that we should be and are the country of finest food production in the world. In this legislation we have aligned the standards and as the previous speaker said made the system easier. 
I am not sure that making it easier is the objective of the bill. It should not be; it should be making the system better—that is more consistent and more effective. It should guarantee that those from this country who go offshore or sell into the domestic market can say they know how the food was produced where it came from and that it is safe for consumption. As previous speakers have said there are far too many cases of food-borne illness in this country. They cost us something like $80 million a year. That is a huge cost to pay just for not eating the right food or not handling it correctly. We must try our best to reduce that aside from all the issues of our reputation. 
Let me go through some of the processes in the bill and the basic concept of companies having a food plan. If they are substantive producers of food they will have to develop their own food plan. There will be a template I understand which means that sectors or businesses do not have to keep reinventing the wheel and I think that is a very smart move. Too often through the Resource Management Act or other legislation we place an obligation on organisations to come up with their own safety plan or whatever. There will be a template and companies or organisations can have a look at that and see how it applies to them. There will be the ability for them to have their own food plan if they fall outside the basic parameters laid down. So no one will be exempt on the basis that they do not quite fit the square box and we welcome that. 
There will be some questions on the issue of self-policing. The basis of it is developing one’s own food plan having standards and maintaining those standards. The meat industry for example is under huge pressure at the moment. I am not quite sure whether we could rely on the meat industry to police its own standards of processing and export. We need in many cases to have an oversight body which will be a local body in many cases. It will have to monitor the food plans. 
Although we would be relying on self-policing ultimately there must be a penalty regime and an oversight body that can step in because when pressures come upon any business or organisation people tend to cut corners. We cannot afford to have any food business—be it a restaurant a takeaway bar or a major exporter—cutting corners in that area. As I have said our reputation is at risk here. 
A custom-made food plan—a plan that applies to a certain organisation and falls outside the ability to use a template—will be overseen by the territorial local authority or by the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry ultimately. Of course there are some questions—and this may not be the time to raise this issue—but with the Food Safety Authority now being merged back into the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry there are questions of expertise or a possible dumbing down. The Minister is shaking her head and I hope she is right. 
I know that the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry is often consumed by its trade interests. It will on many occasions advise Ministers that we should not provide any assistance because it might impact on our trade reputation offshore. Well we have to make sure that the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry does not compromise its advice to Ministers or its operation of policing the food legislation. It should not compromise that in any way. The ministry has to take a close look at itself and assess whether it can objectively maintain the highest standards and not be subject to issues of trade industry lobbying or whatever. 
The food handler guidance regime was of concern when Labour looked at this legislation. I am referring to the ability for people to have sausage sizzles and engage in fundraising activities. I know that there was a concern that we might have the food police—the food Nazis was the nasty term at that time—coming in to stop people selling sausages. That is not the case. Schools and organisations like St John Ambulance fire brigades or whatever who have sausage sizzles on a regular basis or sell other forms of food need to know they can continue to do that. We certainly intend that to occur. 
I am sure that the Primary Production Committee when following the process on this bill will try to uphold that but I have to ask the Minister the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry and local authorities to ensure that we do not have overzealous people policing sausage sizzles. I know that people wear gloves at most of them. The old days of having a smoking wheezing enthusiastic school secretary handing us a sausage— 
Hon Maurice Williamson 
: They taste better with a bit of cigarette ash. 
Hon DAMIEN O’CONNOR 
: Well yes they did taste different and I guess they helped build up our immunity to many things but I think those days have long gone. We have to ensure that in upholding higher standards we do not open the door for an overzealous local council rep to come along and shut those events down. I think we reached a good compromise in that area and I hope we can maintain that during the select committee’s deliberations and finally back in this House. 
Labour supports the bill. We have been very proud to be part of its development. We support the Government in bringing it to the House and ensuring that we have in place the best system of food management in the world so that we can rightfully uphold Brand New Zealand and say that we will now and in the future produce the highest quality food for top-end consumers be they in China India the European Union or the US. I commend the bill to the House and I recommend and support its passage through the House.