Sharples Pita: Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Sharples Pita: Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:642;Page:11842] 
Dr PITA SHARPLES (Co-Leader—Maori Party) 
: 
 Tena koe Mr Deputy Speaker. The Maori Party will be supporting the Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Amendment Bill. It is an interesting coincidence that this bill is being discussed on the day the Law Commission Te Aka Matua o Te Ture released its issues paper entitled  
Presentation of New Zealand Statute Law 
. The paper begins with the premise that New Zealand’s statute law falls well short of a basic standard that the law must be accessible to the public. The paper states: “ …our statute law as a whole lacks coherence is untidy and unwieldy and is difficult to find understand and use.” That is hardly a great advertisement for Acts of Parliament. 
In this setting then the recommendation from the Primary Production Committee to include a new provision to clarify the purpose of the Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Amendment Bill in order to “address any concerns regarding obscurity” is greatly welcomed. The Primary Production Committee recommends the insertion of a new clause 5A to make explicit the scheme of the Act how the Act works and its relationship to other Acts. 
I want to make a point of this recommendation because statements of purpose are extremely important in assisting citizens in knowing and understanding how the law affects them. In the case of this bill the understanding that no agricultural compound may be used in New Zealand unless its use is authorised by or under this Act is a vital step towards clarifying the original policy intent of the bill. 
Another key change introduced by the Primary Production Committee is the proposal to make explicit the relationship of this bill to other Acts—variously listed as the Animal Products Act the Food Act the Wine Act the Animal Welfare Act the Biosecurity Act the Medicines Act and the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act. Again this is a welcome innovation which the Law Commission also has something to say about. 
The commission promoted the practice of looking to historical Acts to interpret modern provisions in order to provide the broader context for understanding. Its report released today describes the impressive process carried out in the case of  
Ngati Apa 
 v  
Attorney-General 
 in 2003 in which the court considered 37 Acts in deciding the issue of whether any historical legislation had extinguished any Maori customary property in the seabed and foreshore. That case the House will recall confirmed—following the expert interpretation of the precedent set by these 37 Acts—the possibility of territorial claims by Maori groups to the foreshore and seabed. It was a decision that again the House will recall has led to perhaps the most significant legislative debate that thinking New Zealanders would consider has taken place in decades. 
As history has shown the current Government chose to wilfully discard the expert interpretation of the statute in the case of the Foreshore and Seabed Act and instead ran roughshod into a process that squashed any opportunity for Maori or the courts to be able to benefit from due access to justice. We hope therefore that in the case of this Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Amendment Bill the wisdom and precedent established by the broader context of its relationship to other Acts will have meaning and will serve to improve the regulatory framework. 
The Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Amendment Bill amends the 1997 Act to include provisions to protect public health from the adverse effects of agricultural compounds. We in the Maori Party are pleased to support any amendments to regulate and assess the contamination of food for the benefit of public health. We note in particular the support of the New Zealand Veterinary Association to include the management of risks to humans in the revision of the original Act. 
Although the management of risks is meant to be covered by the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act the Act is not sufficient to the task. It excludes some of the key risks from veterinary medicines including antibiotic resistance in humans arising from their use in humans; infectious agents such as live vaccines; needle-prick injuries; drugs of habituation dependency and abuse; and illegal use of performance-enhancing drugs such as steroids. In including the management of human risks the revised Act will therefore offer an opportunity for a one-stop shop to regulate veterinary medicines. 
As the Law Commission made clear the linkages between Acts of Parliament are a vital means of enhancing the quality and meaning of legislation. I also want to make clear the importance of the link between the revised Act and the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act in relation to the risk of contamination. Let me mention something of great interest to Maori: pig hunting. The nation saw this at first hand with our own Corporal Bill Henry Apiata who was awarded the Victoria Cross for bravery in Afghanistan. He said publicly that rather than being honoured at all the celebratory events he would have preferred to be pig hunting. 
What do kai moana hunting shooting and fishing have to do with the Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Amendment Bill? A 2005 report  
Wild Food Contamination 
 describes anecdotal evidence that hunters sometimes leave skinned carcases of poisoned possums that wild pigs can consume. The report highlights the need for a better understanding of the status of wild food and its consumption in New Zealand in order to determine whether there is a risk to public health and if there is how it might be reduced. 
We know there is a risk of secondary poisoning when say weka or pigs eat possum carcasses and humans then go and eat those same pigs. Therefore the potential of contamination and poisoning of wild animals of shellfish and of watercress has relevance both to this bill and to the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act. We believe that this issue merits greater consideration by the House. 
Finally I think it is also important to note that it is not enough to regulate and risk manage toxicity levels and to improve the regulatory framework; we also need to consider opportunities to make progress towards an organic and GE-free Aotearoa. The Maori Party believes that all people have a fundamental right to clean air land water and food. Such a commitment means we must work on all fronts to be protected from the production release and disposal of toxic and hazardous waste. A necessary component of such a pathway would be to look at ways to reduce reliance on pesticides and fertilisers. 
We will support this bill as it is in keeping with our responsibility towards upholding kaitiakitanga whakapapa and whanaungatanga. This is a commitment we make to ensure we use the resources of the Earth in a way that preserves the planet and the peoples for current and future generations. Thank you Mr Deputy Speaker.