Ardern Shane: National Animal Identification and Tracing Bill — Third Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Ardern Shane: National Animal Identification and Tracing Bill — Third Reading 
[Sitting date: 14 February 2012. Volume:677;Page:380. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
SHANE ARDERN (National—Taranaki - King Country) 
: 
 I do not know where to start after that speech. I am suitably impressed I think I should say for a start. You know the member for Wellington Central either has Jim Anderton’s speech notes or he has been talking to the Hon Damien O’Connor—or maybe he has had some advice from Clayton Cosgrove. But I have to say that was a remarkably good speech from the new deputy leader of the Labour Party on this topic so I congratulate him on it.  
The issues canvassed so far are absolutely right. I think that Mr Robertson said that foot-and-mouth could cost New Zealand $10 billion; the last estimate I saw on that was that potentially it could cost $25 billion per year—not one off; per year. That would devastate the New Zealand economy if it were to happen at its worst possible impact. To be able to trace animals in the event of a biosecurity incursion regardless of what the incursion may be is an essential part of having integrity in the system around biosecurity. This National Animal Identification and Tracing Bill is the first step I guess you can say in moving forward into the 21st century technology in regard to doing that.  
The issues that were canvassed in the Primary Production Committee and through the submission process both in terms of the consultation paper that was put together first of all to form the bill and then the process as the select committee went through its work are the issues of retention rates in sheep in particular. That is the reason why the Government at this point has chosen not to have lambs or sheep included in the national identification regulations. So that issue has to be resolved and I think technology in time will find an answer to that. In fact some work has gone on in the US in recent years around implants. Now everyone throws their hands up in the air when you use the term “implant” but basically it is using the same kind of technology that has been used in New Zealand for registration of dogs but in a way that it can be inserted with integrity so that the device itself retains its reliability and also so it does not become a problem in further processing of the carcass of an animal which is quite a challenge.  
That is something that has been worked on. I think it will be overcome in time and when it is overcome then of course the problem with retention rates of tagging devices in sheep will be overcome and the cost then will be reduced substantially. So I think that is probably where we need to start cranking up the research.  
I notice that the Animal Health Board itself is likely to be the group—the instrument if you like the team of people—that will drive a lot of that work and potentially may be the owner and controller of the database in conjunction of course and in partnership with the Government because the integrity of that database is equally as important as anything else that goes with this whole keeping of traceability so that the integrity of the system is maintained.  
It is absolutely essential if we are going to be a First World exporter of high quality protein products particularly from animal production that we have traceability that will stand up to the scrutiny of the international markets. When you look at what is driving growth in—particularly—high quality production areas it is that traceability that the member for Wellington Central spoke of. He used the example of the Icebreaker brand and that is a very good example. But there are many others. If you look at some of the products that come out of our dairy industry now going into nutraceuticals and pharmaceuticals clearly the integrity or safety of that product is essential. Well the same will apply with meat products and other animal products that are produced on our New Zealand farms as we speak. So having a solid robust database using the best technology and using the best measurement systems—that is how you scan or read high numbers of cattle or sheep as the case may be in a timely and cost-effective way—is something that this system and this bill is enabling of.  
As we watch that develop I suspect we will see quite a bit of development around the different types of measurement systems and measuring devices. There was a lot of debate at the time of the select committee hearings on this—around the use of high frequency versus low frequency devices. The robustness of those devices was the thing in question. I guess the biggest challenge for the select committee was to make sure that the bill was able to adapt to whatever device the market and the farming users decided to use and not to try to second-guess what would be the best. It would appear to us that having the ability to be able to measure large numbers of animals in a simple way—and if you can just imagine for a moment Mr Assistant Speaker Tisch and I know you may have some experience with this yourself—being able to measure a whole flock of sheep or yard of cattle with a device that is able to scan that area within a reasonable proximity what a wonderful piece of technology that would be to be able to know how many you had in the yard for a start to know each individual animal by number and to know what the ages and various groups and sector groups of those animals were. Think about then being able to feed that information into a drafting system like the Protrack system designed by Livestock Improvement Corporation which I know you have a close family association with Mr Assistant Speaker. That would be a wonderful ability for farming so that you could actually draft animals as you wished by entering the data into a computer in a centralised place. Just imagine how that would simplify the handling of large dairy herds or large flocks of sheep or cattle for that matter. So those things will develop.  
As that happens what you will see is the commercial drivers for such a system will overtake the anxiety that some farmers have now about cost because there will be a financial benefit to them for doing it. Those were the big debating points that Federated Farmers raised in the early stages of the discussion and what they could see was just yet another cost being imposed on the farming sector without any real justification for that cost. So I think we have moved past that point now to where the advantages are overwhelming and most farmers who have been watching this debate and watching the technology develop are now much more receptive to it than they were perhaps 5 years ago.  
The other major issue of course is when we are signing up to international trade agreements to be able to go into those negotiations with a high degree of certainty that what we are about to sign up to will be able to be delivered with traceability back to individual farms individual animals with the safety standards in place. Recently remember the melamine scare in China which had the whole of the dairy industry shaking in its boots for a moment. We of course in New Zealand are able to say that this product comes from this production system it is safe it is reliable and it will not suffer the same fate as that did. It is with those types of issues in mind that it is my pleasure to support this bill through the third reading. Thank you.