O'Connor Damien; Williams Arena; Kuriger BarbaraHon DAMIEN O'CONNOR (Labour): That just summarised the ideology—or idiology"—of the Government of the day. I'll read out a couple of things here and one is from Dr Elizabeth Heeg chief executive of the New Zealand Forest Owners Association. She says assurance schemes are important for maintaining integrity throughout the supply chain. She goes on to say that "the registration scheme was meant to improve information across the forestry and woods processing supply chain improve professional standards and build greater confidence in the sector. Unfortunately it has achieved the opposite—delivering added cost rather than added value." Let's have a look at the added cost. So what are we talking about? This is the fourth-biggest industry in our country—fourth-biggest export sector. As I say logs everywhere in Timaru Wellington Gisborne you name it. So there was a regime where anyone with a ute and a computer could roll up to a farmer see a few trees and say "Look we'd like to buy those trees and we'll just put them into—." The farmer might want a bit of cash and so they'd say "OK." No assurance; didn't know whether the guy was a crook or not. Others could roll up and say "Look you should plant some trees there you'll make a whole fortune 10 percent return on equity. Great deal." Hon Mark Patterson: Who's the Labour whip? Tell him you're supporting the bill!Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR: You didn't know whether that person was a crook or not. And Minister Patterson there is a classic because his mate Shane Jones had the wisdom and the vision to know that it should be tidied up—it should be tidied up. Indeed that's what he passed in 2022 and do you know what the cost—and I'll come back to that because all that regime did according to the Government was add cost. How much? For someone to register $444 and $320 to renew—annual fee. That small amount provided assurance through the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) for biosecurity standards that the trees came from the right place that the people were paid that we didn't have slave labour involved in the export of trees or the supply because those requirements are core components of our right to export to many markets. So the question I have for the Government—in trying to reduce through the passage of this legislation the $444 that it costs for someone to register as a log trader able to trade millions and millions and millions of dollars of logs into markets that are sensitive to biosecurity requirements sensitive to slave labour sensitive to deforestation requirements—and so we the taxpayer through MPI will have to provide that assurance. We won't be receiving any money for it and we won't know who the person who's traded the logs has done. "Oh there'll be a voluntary scheme."; that's what they say. Well Minister Patterson over there he knows how effective voluntary schemes—do you know why? Because he's currently intervening in a wool industry that has had a voluntary contribution to its future and development. Do you know what happened there?So can I say that I reluctantly personally support this piece of legislation. Steve Abel: You don't have to—you don't have to Mr O'Connor.Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR: I do. As a party we have decided that we'll side with the industry. The industry has asked to take away the huge burden of $444 to register as a log trader and the $320 annual fee to remove that huge impost for someone who might be trading millions of dollars of logs. Well I asked the dairy owner or the person who's got a licence to sell at a market and sell a bit of food what they'll be paying for registration for the right to do that—probably about 300 or 400 bucks; relative to their income a huge impost. Is the Government going to take those registration requirements away? Silence. So they're happy to help the forest industry. I did a quick survey. Half a million dollars was donated to ACT and New Zealand First from forest industry interests—half a million dollars. I wonder if that money was donated on the basis that this fee be removed. I can't answer that question. It's up to—Hon Chris Bishop: Point of order.Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR: Ah here's a sensitive Minister.Hon Chris Bishop: Madam Speaker the member is I think the longest-serving member of the House and he knows that to make imputations in the way he just made is grossly out of order and a breach of Standing Orders and he should apologise. ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh): Speaking to the point of order Arena Williams. ARENA WILLIAMS (Labour—Manurewa): Thank you Madam Speaker. Appreciate the point of order from the Hon Chris Bishop. The member did not make an accusation in what he said; I was listening to that carefully. He raised a question and he hasn't provided an answer to that question.Hon Damien O'Connor: Madam Speaker?ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh): Just before we move on—excuse me member—I'm just going to take some advice on this from the Clerk. In response to the Hon Chris Bishop's point of order: if the member took offence that's one thing. I think what the member Damien O'Connor said was probably close to the wind but not quite a slur. But it was very close so I do caution the member. But if Chris Bishop took offence to that then that's another matter.Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR: Madam Speaker I'm referring to publicly available information and anyone can go and look at that register and draw their own conclusions; I've drawn my own. I'm asking the question: what will other people think? Because one of the concerns that people have across this country is the robustness and the health of our democracy and I have been here a long time and one of the things I am most passionate about is that that remains robust; absolutely. So all I'm asking in what seems like a strange proposition that for—after a wise piece of legislation introduced by the Hon Shane Jones in 2022 to tidy up a rogue industry and I could go back and quote some of his astute quotes in the House to actually say "Let's tidy this up that those with a ute and a laptop driving around the country seeing opportunities to buy sell or advise on forestry were undermining the integrity and the credibility of the forest industry." Therefore registering those people and knowing that there was some accountability particularly for the export trade but also to ensure that people who had contracts for local supply could actually get their wood when they needed it—this is what it's all about. So removing this and going back to the wild west of log trading will be something that this coalition Government regrets. I know Minister Patterson over there understands the flaws in a pure market ideology. So in supporting this piece of legislation I leave the question not about funding—people can make their own conclusions—how will a Government assure people who import logs from New Zealand that they were harvested from sustainable harvest regimes because that's what we say; that they are free of any pest or diseases because the incoming market doesn't want them; and that they weren't felled or processed in any way by slave labour because that's also an assurance that has to be given to the international market. MPI funded by the taxpayer squeezed by the coalition Government will then have to step up and do that work with no cost recovery regime because this piece of legislation takes away the registration and certification requirements and says anyone can go out and buy and trade logs and anyone can go out and advise on forestry. I worked on behalf of a good honest tradesperson who had bought into a forestry investment on bad advice and suffered a huge loss because of it. The legislation that's in place at the moment until this passes of course enables us to search back and find out who that person is and deregister them. That will no longer occur so for those people looking to invest in forestry or trade in logs: beware—beware. So we have supported this on the basis of good faith. I'm very very uneasy. I'll say that and I'll put that on the record. None the less there's quite a bit of unease over that side of the House as well. There's enough pragmatic members members like at the back there who sat on the one of the biggest companies in the country understands the value of cooperation and of legislation and good regulations to ensure Fonterra operates properly. We don't have rogue traders in dairy. We certify that and tidy them up. We're going to have rogue traders in forestry and that potentially will undermine the integrity the credibility of the fourth-largest export industry in this country. So we'll support it but beware—beware. Steve Abel: Cross the floor Damien. Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR: Well we're a democracy here. We're a democracy over this side of the House too so occasionally I get outvoted. None the less beware of the passage of this legislation and its effect on the forest industry."