Prosser Richard: Border Processing (Trade Single Window and Duties) Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeProsser Richard: Border Processing (Trade Single Window and Duties) Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:13097. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]RICHARD PROSSER (NZ First): I am pleased to rise on behalf of New Zealand First to take a relatively brief call in this first reading of the Border Processing (Trade Single Window and Duties) Bill. New Zealand First will support this bill going to the select committee and probably beyond. I say that though with some trepidation because this bill appears on first examination to have a great deal recommending it. It appears to simplify. It appears to streamline. It appears to make swifter easier and more efficient. It appears to promise to make the establishment of a single window through which importers and exporters both may conduct their requisite transactions with Her Majesty’s New Zealand customs and excise and meet their biosecurity obligations a less cumbersome and more user-friendly experience. Therein hangs the conundrum.This bill promises a great deal. It promises to be the best thing since sliced bread and if it works it will be a very good thing indeed. The Joint Border Management System itself if it works as intended and as advertised will be a good thing. It is clearly a well-intended initiative and as long as it proves to be true to label it will be of great benefit to the Government traders and travellers alike. For anyone who has cause to cross the border who has goods that must cross the border inwards or outwards and for Government departments that have responsibility for or interest in those people a good well-designed and well-functioning one-stop shop as the explanatory note describes it offers a tantalising promise. So we hope that it will. We hope that it will perform as desired and as intended and we are certainly supportive of the concept behind it.The potential pitfall of course is the possibility that it might not work or it might not work properly or it might have teething issues that expose this country to biosecurity risks. The Ministry for Primary Industries is still a relatively new organisation. The melding together of what were three separate Government departments is no casual undertaking and there are still hiccups coming through the system as people and methodologies which used to operate independently learn towork together in an environment where the greater part of the new organisation is unfamiliar territory for all of them.Taking on this partnership with yet another department that being the New Zealand Customs Service will bring its own challenges and requirements for learning and we sincerely hope that the new system will be able to be brought to full operational functionality with as few problems as is humanly possible.We are pleased that it is not all new ground that is to be covered—that established international models such as the World Customs Organization will be adopted and that the lodging and formatted data with regard to customs biosecurity and food-related information will be compatible with international standards and with the systems used by our trading partners so that is very encouraging. But we will need to be vigilant. New Zealand needs to pay very close attention indeed to the potential for biosecurity risks being allowed to slip between the cracks as we transition to this new regime. I am sure that everyone involved with the management and security at the border will have this as a primary concern. As New Zealand First and others have said repeatedly in recent months in this House and in relation to various Government bills and policy actions it is absolutely essential that our biosecurity operations and personnel are resourced adequately and focused appropriately in order to ensure that this potential for incursion is met and minimised.Online portals for processing forms and information are all well and good but they are of little value in identifying shipping containers full of cocaine or muddy boots bearing the foot-and-mouth virus. It is our sincerest hope that the Government will not use this new system as an excuse for making yet further cuts to biosecurity resourcing resulting in even fewer X-rays being taken fewer dog teams working our ports and airports and fewer boots on the ground.I do not intend to detain the House unnecessarily during this time of urgency when the most appropriate forum to address any concerns that we have will be the select committee. We look forward to examining the bill in greater detail there and to listening to the submissions of the public who are wise beyond the recognition afforded to them in too many cases where Government policies are being forged.In closing then I would reiterate that New Zealand First acknowledges the wisdom behind the concept that is driving this bill and we are certainly in favour of the benefits that it will bring so long as it is able to function properly. But the proof of the pudding will be in the eating—not that the proof is in the pudding. Why do people say that? Too often we hear people proclaiming that the proof is in the pudding. No it is not. That does not even make sense. The proof of the pudding is in the eating is the correct quote and that does make sense. What it means here is that this bill appears to be a very good idea but the proof of that will be whether it works properly or not. We certainly hope it will and we are happy to support the bill going to the select committee. Thank you.