Hutchison Paul: Imports and Exports (Restrictions) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Hutchison Paul: Imports and Exports (Restrictions) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:609;Page:6957] 
Dr PAUL HUTCHISON (NZ National—Port Waikato) 
: It was indeed interesting to hear the Minister and I am glad that he commends the support from the Opposition parties for this bill which generally indeed is appropriate. But in focusing on Part 1 which deals with both the commencement and the purpose I would particularly like to support my colleague Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith’s amendment that clause 3 be amended by inserting after the words “international obligations” the words “as specified in section 2(1) of the principal Act.” 
There is absolutely no doubt that the purpose which as stated is to enable New Zealand to give better effect to its international obligations to restrict the exportation of certain goods does not in any way enlighten us as to what those obligations are or the depth and width of them and it is very important that we do have a bit of precision. After all if we look at the commencement date we see that this bill was introduced to the House in May 2002. This is a non-controversial bill that if passed would show the goodwill and the compliance of New Zealand to its international obligations. But sadly this dilatory Labour Government just waited and waited before finally bringing it to the House under urgency. That is an indictment on the way it does business. 
I reiterate the point that it is almost an instinctive impulse of a socialist Labour Government to have the word “restrictions” in the title of a bill. As I think the Hon Ken Shirley pointed out is this again the Pavlovian dog rethinks coming out once more—control restrict? This is the Labour Government that we know of old. Its true instincts are once again coming out. The amendment suggested by Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith is eminently sensible because after all one of the international conventions we are concerned about is the Rotterdam convention which was signed by New Zealand as long ago as September 1998. It requires New Zealand to exchange information between parties about trade in hazardous chemicals before any trading takes place. Parties may consent to allow importation impose conditions on imports or not consent to the trade at all control exports and notify an international secretariat of all additional chemicals currently banned or severely restricted at national level. The convention currently lists 31 chemicals and of course there is the ability to add to or subtract from that list as is appropriate. The other two conventions that are appropriate are the Stockholm convention and the Waigani convention which was signed in Papua New Guinea as long ago as 1995. The Waigani convention bans the importation into forum island countries of hazardous and radioactive wastes and controls the transboundary movement and management of hazardous wastes within the South Pacific region. That convention was finalised by Pacific forum countries Australia and New Zealand as long ago as 16 September 1995. 
Once again we see here a hugely important aspect of this legislation that is not at all implied in the title or the purpose clause. I must say that it is wonderful to have in the Chamber people like Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith who has such a tremendous sense of knowledge and institutional experience that he can make such eminently good amendments.