4. Question No. 4—AgricultureGARETH HUGHES (Green) to the Minister of AgricultureQuestion No. 4—Agriculture4. GARETH HUGHES (Green) to the Minister of Agriculture: What actions if any did he and the Ministry for Primary Industries take in response to welfare concerns raised in January this year about the live export of 2000 New Zealand cows to Sri Lanka?Hon SHANE JONES (Minister of Forestry) on behalf of the Minister of Agriculture: There have been no exports of live animals to Sri Lanka for two years and there are no exports planned. Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) officials have been instructed to conduct a review to ensure that proposed shipments of live animals from New Zealand to any location are compliant with various obligations around animal welfare.Gareth Hughes: Why did the Minister write in March to say that he was comfortable" with the live export regime when hundreds of animals exported from New Zealand and Australia have died in what's been described as an unmitigated disaster from a human and animal welfare perspective?Hon SHANE JONES: On behalf of the Minister the reference to the fact that the export regime for live cattle—I was referring to the fact that it's a strict one. The animals that passed away in Sri Lanka I am advised passed away over in Sri Lanka. The point however that needs to be made is the director-general can impose conditions on any journey to ensure that animal welfare risks during the period of time that they are in transit are attended to. I've also asked officials to provide an analysis so we can be crystal clear about the benefit or otherwise to our trading partners and New Zealand.Gareth Hughes: How on earth could MPI have signed off on the live export to Sri Lanka when that country's own Auditor-General says it was poorly planned inhumane and many were diseased with around 10 percent dying so far?Hon SHANE JONES: I'm advised that the shipment the member refers to was well before the Auditor-General became seized of the matter and also to remind the House that MPI does take its animal welfare responsibilities seriously and as has already been noted follows strict rules and we are getting further analysis done as to whether or not things need to be improved in order for such trade to continue.Gareth Hughes: Given the limited control over the welfare of the animals once they arrive in these other countries and the incredibly long distances involved in shipping from New Zealand does the Minister think there's a reputational risk for New Zealand to continue with this practice?Hon SHANE JONES: As I've said officials have been tasked with providing analysis of the export trade and also we are anticipating such analysis will arrive with us soon. We do need to weigh up the benefits of other countries establishing their own farming and growing systems to feed their people against the animal welfare issues that the member is raising. But once again to reassure the House as awful as that incident was in terms of perceptions of animal welfare they did not die in transit.Gareth Hughes: Will the Minister ask officials to study the EU's recent decision where they voted in February to end the live export of animals to countries with lower animal welfare standards or better yet why don't we just stop the practice?Hon SHANE JONES: Once again the example that the member refers to goes back two years ago and on behalf of the Minister there is an unwillingness to prejudge policy decisions in the House today that have implications for New Zealand and its partners. We will wait until the necessary streams of advice have been requested and Cabinet colleagues are seized of the issues."