Twyford Phil: Animal Welfare (Treatment of Animals) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Twyford Phil: Animal Welfare (Treatment of Animals) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:668;Page:15225] 
PHIL TWYFORD (Labour) 
: 
 I truly regret that so quickly this debate has been trivialised by the previous speaker Shane Ardern who likened the inhumane cruelty that pigs and hens are subjected to under the industrial farming practices we are talking about tonight to the plight of an overweight Labrador living in a luxury apartment. I regret that the debate has been so trivialised so quickly. 
Labour is proud to stand alongside our Green colleagues tonight to support in particular Sue Kedgley who has brought the Animal Welfare (Treatment of Animals) Amendment Bill to the House. For a long time Sue Kedgley has been a leader on these issues and her commitment to this cause is appreciated by many many New Zealanders who care about this issue. 
I want to acknowledge the campaign that has been run by SAFE Save Animals From Exploitation and Hans Kriek who has mobilised people to send thousands of letters and postcards to members of Parliament asking that we support this bill. The campaign to stop pigs being kept in crates and to stop hens being kept in battery cages looks to me like a campaign whose time has come. I believe that New Zealanders are ready to support change in this area. 
The campaign has been helped particularly in recent times by Mike King the former poster boy for the pork industry who has since opened his eyes and turned against very inhumane farming practices. He has been awakened to the realities of the shocking farming practices that were shown on the television screens of New Zealanders. I think that caused a sea change in public awareness and strength of feeling on this issue. With the help of Mike King the campaign exposed horrific abuse of animals in the pork and egg industries. 
Following the images that were shown on TV we heard promises from the National Government that it would make a review of the pig welfare code a top priority and the Minister of Agriculture said it in this House. But almost 18 months later the National Government is still dragging its feet and pigs continue to be subjected to the most inhumane treatment. I say that that is unforgivable. 
Labour supports this bill. We believe that the maltreatment of animals this bill seeks to address is completely unacceptable and reflects poorly on our society. Secondly we believe that these industries must capture the high-value high end of the markets that they are in. That means high ethical standards in raising animals and in the egg-laying industry. The best-quality New Zealand beef and lamb is sold in high-end outlets throughout the world to some of the richest and most discerning consumers. One of the principal selling points of New Zealand beef and lamb internationally is that our beef and lamb are free range. That is an incredibly important part of the New Zealand brand. It has huge economic value for our nation and it is high time that the egg-laying industry and the pork industry follow the beef and lamb industry and protect the brand. 
It is time that Parliament changed the outdated and unethical farming practices that are allowed and perpetuated by the loophole in the Animal Welfare Act that allows practices that are deemed to be inconsistent with the principal provisions in the Act. The loophole allows those practices to continue in perpetuity under the guise of those practices being so-called exceptional circumstances. That is wrong. Sue Kedgley’s bill seeks to close that loophole and require those practices to be phased out within 5 years. That is the right thing to do. It is the right thing ethically and it is the right thing economically for our farming industry. 
The bill also clarifies practices that breach key sections of the principal Act. In line with international best practice it clarifies the definition of “physical health and behavioural needs” to include animals having freedom of movement to express normal patterns of behaviour such as being able to turn round and walk about. That minimal requirement should be part of our definition of ethical farming practices.