Eckhoff Gerrard: Border Security Bill — In Committee 
Eckhoff Gerrard: Border Security Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:617;Page:13277] 
GERRARD ECKHOFF (ACT) 
: 
 It was with some incredulity that I have just listened to what I can only describe as a vitriolic diatribe from a Minister who is totally out of his depth. He is the Minister of Fisheries for goodness sake and he was totally out of his depth. He does not even understand the basics of border security clearance. The Minister said that the State would pay the bills of exporters and he talked about Government support and so on. I have news for the Minister: the State or the Government creates nothing. All that this Government does is to take from other people. It takes from taxpayers. The Minister and this Government create absolutely nothing. [ 
Interruption 
] He is mentioning something to the Chairman. 
This Border Security Bill is one that every member in the Chamber would like to support. There would not be one member who does not think that for New Zealand border security is probably No. 1. New Zealand is a major exporting country—the No. 1 exporting country in the world as far as I am concerned. The Minister does not seem to understand that we do not survive if we do not export. We will not survive without exporting. Mr Peter Brown talked about the importance of shipping to this country not to mention all the other forms of transport. Border security is crucial. I know that the previous speakers from the National Party Mr Ardern and Mr Carter and from New Zealand First support that concept but for its own electoral purpose the Government has said it will build its surplus as big as it possibly can then distribute those funds at election time so that it can benefit and whack the exporters yet again. 
There is a fundamental principle that I as an ACT member of Parliament would not break. If there were a private good associated entirely with the exporting of my product—which as a farmer is meat and wool etc.—I would accept that. But significant work has been done by Capital Economics. A very respected economist by the name of Bryce Wilkinson has done an in-depth study on this issue and he came to the very clear conclusion that the exporting industry is right and the Government is wrong and that export clearance is a public good. I had better tell the Minister in the chair David Benson-Pope what a public good is. A public good is one that cannot exclude anyone from benefiting. The public of this country benefit from exporting—it is not just the farmer the processing company or the flower exporter who benefits. Everybody benefits right down the train from those who are in the exporting business. A private benefit of course is one that can exclude people from benefiting. How does for example the meat industry exclude the freezing worker from benefiting from exporting? It cannot. It pays good wages and it is a thriving vibrant industry. That is a very simple illustration of why export clearance is not a private good. It is very much a public good and that is what the argument from the Travel and Trade Industry Coalition is all about. 
The Federated Farmers submission to the Government has obviously been totally ignored but I want to read out a few words from it. Federated Farmers state that they are concerned that the bill is “based on poor process and lacks sound principles.” Well is that not the truth? The Minister in the chair can pretend to be busying himself there. It is a pity he is not listening to those words from an important grouping of people in this country who state that this bill lacks sound principle and is based on poor process. There are no sensible checks and balances being introduced in order to ensure that the powers exercised by the New Zealand Customs Service are reasonable and that any cost recovery must be met on the principles of equity efficiency transparency and justifiability. This part fails on all counts.