Moroney Sue: Radiation Safety Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMoroney Sue: Radiation Safety Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 10 March 2015. Volume:703;Page:2094. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]SUE MORONEY (Labour): It is a pleasure to rise and speak following on from that considered contribution from Mojo Mathers on the Radiation Safety Bill. I do want just to remind people who are watching this debate that the contribution before from Jacqui Dean from the National Party is rather interesting when seen in the context that she of course is most famous in this Parliament for writing to Jim Anderton when he was a Minister and asking him what he was going to do to mitigate the risks and the serious harm caused to New Zealanders by their consumption of water. That is what Jacqui Dean is in fact most famous for in this House. I think it pays to remember that. It puts into context her kind of interesting little rant about microwaves when you know some of the background about what she is famous for.It is a pleasure to rise and speak on this bill if somewhat a surprise for me to rise and speak on this bill. I can only think that because it is replacing a piece of legislation that has taken the entire course of my lifetime to replace that perhaps that is why I was chosen to speak on this bill. I do want to just let the House know that Labour does actually support this bill going to the Health Committee because it does of course repeal and replace the Radiation Protection Act 1965. That will be replaced by the Radiation Safety Bill.Of course technology has changed quite a lot in the course of my lifetime. I am not going to go into too much detail about my earliest memories and how technology has changed over the course of that time.Clare Curran: Typewriter.SUE MORONEY: The linotype—we might go back to the linotype but I am not going to age myself that much. Suffice to say that we in this Parliament all accept that over that course of time there have been major technological changes and therefore we need legislation that will keep pace with that.One purpose of the bill is to enable New Zealand to meet its international obligations relating to radiation protection radiation safety and security and nuclear non-proliferation under a range of international treaties. Labour does acknowledge the necessity of updating legislation such as the Radiation Protection Act 1965 to keep pace with technological changes. We also of course support a high level of compliance with international best standards and our commitments to international treaties. Those things are paramount and this piece of legislation does address those issues.As has been well traversed in the debate thus far non-ionising radiation is not covered by this bill but it will continue to be regulated by Standards New Zealand. It was interesting to listen to some of the contributions from the National Party members on this. Of course I want to thank Simon O’Connor for reminding us that it was indeed his party that not that long ago did call into question whether our nuclear-free policy would remain.It actually was his party—Dr Megan Woods: “Gone by lunchtime” they said.SUE MORONEY: I had almost forgotten this actually until I heard his contribution but he did remind us that not that long ago his party said that the nuclear-free policy of this country would be gone by lunchtime—it would be gone by lunchtime. So it is interesting. Maybe that is one of the reasons it has taken the National Government so long to bring this before the House. Perhaps it is embarrassed about the stance that was taken by its party at that stage or maybe that is a dead rat that it is still chewing on; I am not so sure about that.However in my remaining minute I do want to just address the issue that last year more irradiated fruit from Australia was allowed into New Zealand. Labour’s policies of having an independent food safety council and having country-of-origin labelling will help to keep consumers informed about their food choices in that type of environment. Having a food safety council independent from the Ministry for Primary Industries is I think a no-brainer. That was proven about a year ago—or was it a little longer than that—when Fonterra had its scare over botulism.So these are very serious issues that do need to be addressed. They will not be addressed through this bill but I do wish the select committee and the officials good luck with their deliberations. Thank you.