Norman Russel: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeNorman Russel: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 07 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12431. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]2.Dr RUSSEL NORMAN (Co-Leader—Green)to thePrime Minister: Does he stand by his statement in Parliament yesterday that “it does seem very very odd thatFonterra allowed production to carry on and for that infant baby formula to go into the supply chain or into the distribution chain”; if so why?Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister):Yes; because that is the natural question that the public overseas customers ourselves and others will be asking.Dr Russel Norman: Does he agree with the characterisation of the chain of events that Fonterra knew that its product could have the dangerousClostridiumbotulinum in it and yet let it be processed into baby formula in Australia re-imported into New Zealand put on supermarket shelves sold to parents and fed to babies all the while Fonterra knew that it could contain theClostridiumbotulinum in it?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: No I am not sure that I would agree with that characterisation. The member is using the word “knew”. I think that is the issue. Up until the Wednesday of last week I do not think that Fonterra did know.Dr Russel Norman: Does the Prime Minister agree that once the initial test was done back in March that showed that there was aClostridium in there Fonterra knew that there was some kind ofClostridium but it just was not sure whether it wasClostridiumbotulinum or a different kind ofClostridium ?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: Firstly I really cannot speak for the company. I do not have ministerial responsibility and secondly I just do not know what the company knew. I know that something showed up in the tests that it undertook in March but I do not know exactly what it understood that to mean and therefore I cannot offer an opinion about whether it was safe for Fonterra to carry on with the processes that carried on from there.Dr Russel Norman: Then why did the Minister yesterday say—and he says he stood by this statement—that he thought it was “very very odd that Fonterra allowed production to carry on …” if he is unsure about it?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I do think it is odd but I cannot offer a view on what the company absolutely knew. What I know from what I have seen in the public domain is that in March there was something that showed up in the tests that were undertaken. I cannot tell you whether that should have waved lots of red flags or none whatsoever. That is what an inquiry will show us. I do think it is a bit odd that those tests showed something in March of this year and yet production carried on.Dr Russel Norman: Does the Prime Minister have any further information about this issue that the Government has not yet made public?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: The member is asking a very broad-ranging question that I cannot answer because I am sure Ministers will have very detailed information about lots of things that would not necessarily have travelled to my office. But if you are asking me whether I have some really specific germane piece of information that really should be in the public domain and is not I have not been advised of anything of that nature.Dr Russel Norman: Is the Prime Minister aware of whether Fonterra has breached any regulations in this process?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: Again no I am not aware. I am aware of the fact that the company has all sorts of legal obligations as does the regulator effectively the Ministry for Primary Industries through food safety. But no at this stage I am not aware whether Fonterra has breached any of those. That is what an inquiry will one day show.Dr Russel Norman: Is the Prime Minister confident that the regulations that are in place are sufficient; if he is confident that they are have any regulations been breached?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I think I have covered off the last part in my earlier answer. In terms of the first one to the best of my knowledge the laws in this area have proven in the past to be sufficient and have worked. Fonterra has been the world’s largest dairyexporter and you have to say on balance and on the whole it has had a very strong consumer record and one of high safety standards. So there is no particular reason that something should have showed up but again that is what an inquiry will show—whether there are any deficiencies.Dr Russel Norman: Does the Prime Minister know whether the Ministry for Primary Industries has the processes in place that would have identified this potential contamination had the Australian manufacturer not required Fonterra to test for it?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: No I cannot answer that question. It can obviously apply a test but it does not apply every test—there are all sorts of potential things you could test for. I am sure the ministry has the capacity to do that but it does not always carry out those tests. My understanding is that this test was carried out in Australia because in all probability one of the markets was going to require this test.