Ardern Shane: Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Ardern Shane: Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:642;Page:11952] 
SHANE ARDERN (National—Taranaki-King Country) 
: 
 In supporting Part 2 of the Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Amendment Bill I make particular reference to the powers that the director-general will be given by this part. Normally one would be a little nervous when one saw the wide-sweeping powers that will be given to that person—who is no doubt a very competent person. But in this case this is the exception. The reason for it being the exception is—as my colleague Eric Roy referred to just previous to my speech—that the kind of expertise and the speed at which technology and drugs are changing is such that we need a person with a very high competency level. We need a person with the department the officials and the advice that goes with the position of director-general. So in this case being able to give that kind of support to the director-general—and I am referring to the powers that the director-general will have and some of them he or she already has under the Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Act—that is provided for in the amendments in this particular part of the bill is sensible in that regard. 
As I said earlier this is a large industry that is very dependent upon being competitive internationally. It is very dependent upon being able to have traceability of the products that we sell in the international market. What makes New Zealand unique is that we export in some industries up to 95 percent of what we produce whereas other jurisdictions around the world consume 95 percent or 100 percent of what they produce and import products from countries like New Zealand. So being able to go out into the marketplace with absolute surety about what we are doing and what we are putting into that which becomes food product through the animals themselves is important. It is something that needs a much higher level of scrutiny to what one would expect even in human health and human medicine because of the market demands around food safety. We have seen a bit lately in recent media about the safety of different products being imported into countries particularly the US from parts of the world where they do not have the same standards that we have. 
As we move further down the track of DNA traceability and are able to trace back to the source of product this will become more and more of an issue. Some of the technology that is being employed some of the market sophistication now is such that I am not sure whether New Zealand will be able to keep up on its own with what is almost a flood of demand coming our way. Having a person of the competency level that we would expect the director-general to have in a position to be able to make those decisions or at least to have an overview of those decisions and give advice to the Minister is essential in this particular Act. I say well done once again to the members of the Primary Production Committee for their work in regard to that. 
I also make reference to the relationship of this bill to Acts other than the principal Act. As I have said the bill makes reference to the Wine Act. Of course the wine industry is a growing industry in this country another major exporter and another industry that exports a high percentage of what it produces as opposed to having it consumed domestically—although the percentages are not as high in that industry as they are in our other more traditional primary industries. That is also important and I thank the committee for the work it has done on clause 48 and the amendments it has made in regard to that. The bill also has reference to a number of other Acts like the Meat Act the Dairy Industry Act and a number of others. I thank the committee for the work it has done on that. 
Just in closing I touch on one point. The Minister for Food Safety Annette King in reference to the bill said that the time it had taken had been by parliamentary standards pretty short. I agree; that is absolutely so. Maybe she might like to inform the Committee when the Conservation (Protection of Trout as a Non-commercial Species) Amendment Bill might make it on to the floor of the House so that it can be processed in a timely way—given that this Government is in the mind to get things processed in a timely way. I suggest that perhaps poor old David Parker who is now probably about the 15th Minister to have his name beside that legislation might want to bring it to the House so it can be properly debated.