Ardern Shane: Animal Welfare Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeArdern Shane: Animal Welfare Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:13061. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]SHANE ARDERN (National—Taranaki - King Country): It is a pleasure to rise and speak in the first reading of the Animal Welfare Amendment Bill and I look forward to the submissions that will come to the Primary Production Committee on this matter. Other speakers have touched on and certainly the Minister for Primary Industries has covered the need for New Zealand to be absolutely transparent and better than most—ahead of the pack if you like—internationally in animal welfare issues. That is without debate and without any dissention I would suggest because we are so dependent on our animal production systems for our export earnings and the standard of living that we enjoy in New Zealand. But there are a few issues I guess that need to be teased out in this discussion—that is just how will this legislation work?What the proposed amendments in the bill do is allow for a regulatory authority or for a code if you like—what has formerly been known as the National Animal Welfare Advisory Committee or NAWAC—to take all things into consideration when it makes its decisions. This brings a higher degree of transparency and enforceability to the work that it does and that is a good thing. It has been required for some time.Could I also touch briefly in the few moments that I have on the issue that has been so passionately spoken about by the Hon John Banks and the Hon Trevor Mallard—that is the testing of psychoactive substances on animals. As a member of the Health Committee as well as the Primary Production Committee I know that the dilemma that the Health Committee faced was whether you would set a separate and different standard for the testing of psychoactive drugs than you would for drugs in general.Hon Trevor Mallard: Yes.SHANE ARDERN: The answer from the member is “Yes.” and if that is the will of Parliament well so be it. But effectively in that debate we were looking at whether or not there should be a full ban or a prohibition if you like on these drugs full stop and I think that Parliament overwhelmingly conceded that prohibitions do not work. Themember himself the Hon Trevor Mallard spoke passionately about a relative who ran a club distributing alcohol in the King Country during the time when there was a prohibition in the King Country.Prohibitions generally do not work so what is the next best option? The next best option is harm minimisation. So then the dilemma is whether you have the same standard of test for the harm minimisation of psychoactive drugs as you would have for any other type of drug that you might use for medical applications. Members have said yes so that is fine. If Parliament decides that is where it should be and that is the overwhelming majority of the consensus well so be it. I have no strong view on that one way or another. I will of course ask the question though do you believe it is better to test these drugs on our young people in New Zealand than it is to have these things tested on animals? That is a debate for people to have and for people to have a view on.I guess the next real issue is the definition of animal welfare because you see everyone has a view on that. Sometimes when I have been in the cities and I see a well-loved German shepherd cooped up in an apartment overweight because the owners are loving the animal to death I actually see that as an animal welfare issue. I do. I see it quite regularly—cats dogs and other loved pets that are overfed under-exercised and cooped up for long hours because the owners are away at work. That is an animal welfare issue.Probably the issue that I really want to touch on in closing though is this. During the flooding in theWhakatāne area—Hon Trevor Mallard: “Fokatāne”.SHANE ARDERN: —in theWhakatāne area there was a major animal welfare issue up there—a major animal welfare issue. There were farms that went completely under water. Houses cow sheds—everything went under water. I was invited up there as part of the agriculture team in the National caucus at that time. The SPCA an organisation that I have a lot of respect for drove out from Tauranga to where it could have been helping people move these animals and carrying out useful work. But instead of that it served notice on some of those farmers because their cows had been standing in a cow yard or somewhere high above the water—and the only way they could keep them alive was to do that—and they were not able to transport them there and then because the Ministry of Transport had shut down the drivers of the trucks that had come from other parts of the country to shift them away.Hon Trevor Mallard: Just shows there’s idiots everywhere—just shows there’s idiots everywhere.SHANE ARDERN: Well yes—well you know Trevor that is what happened—The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): Order!SHANE ARDERN: First of all that is—The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): It is “Mr Mallard”.SHANE ARDERN: The Hon Trevor Mallard.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): That is right. Well done Mr Ardern.SHANE ARDERN: Yes. So that is what happened. So in my view the SPCA were creating an animal welfare issue by being bureaucratic and less than supportive of those people who were distressed at the time and some of the animals were as well.So this is going to be an interesting debate going forward obviously on who says what about what animal welfare is and determining what that actually means and just how through the select committee aided and abetted by good solid legislation we can decide that and the outcomes of it. Thank you. I look forward to the passage of the bill.