McKelvie IanIAN McKELVIE (National—Rangitīkei): Well I was going to be complimentary about my neighbouring MP until he took an unnecessary crack at the other side of the House. I won't respond in kind but I will make the point that I'm of a generation whose father only listened to the Budget to see what the subsidy on 245-T would be. So I will appreciate the need for a hazardous substance piece of legislation going through this House.I also am old enough to remember the lectures we got from Steffan Browning on the use of glyphosate and he would've spent the full 10 minutes and glyphosate would have been mentioned every second of that speech were he here tonight.But I think this is a very good bill. The reason I think it's a very good bill is because if you go back in history and you look at our history as a country and our use of—or our I guess application of what we call hazardous substances and a lot of them of course aren't hazardous substances at all because the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) makes sure of that. In this country we find that we're a very small market but they're a very important part of what we do as a very small market in that we're food producers. We use all sorts of products to produce that food. We're large-animal users in New Zealand for various reasons and of course a lot of these substances apply to animals. I guess if you take it to the extreme a lot of these sort of products apply to humans as well but not necessarily through the EPA or hazardous substances and new organisms (HSNO).But it is necessary for us to have access to the best possible products we can get around the world. Many of the big international companies that supply these products have difficulty justifying coming to New Zealand because our market's so small and the cost of entry here is so large. So I think this bill and the protocols around this bill and the method it intends to use to introduce product to New Zealand I think will be of great value to the country and I think will improve in my view endlessly the process of getting product approved in New Zealand and ensuring that we are competitive in the international marketplace.Only last week interestingly we had the EPA in the Primary Production Committee talking about this not this bill but these very issues and how they go through the processes that they do to approve product in New Zealand. I think we should be pretty pleased or pretty proud actually of the way the EPA operates given that we are a very small market and we're dealing with hundreds and hundreds of different products. They have a pretty challenging situation. So for them to be able to use international information from countries of like interest to New Zealand will be hugely valuable as we go forward in life.As a person who's spent half a lifetime I guess using these products it's always been a concern to me that New Zealand wouldn't have access to the best international products. If we don't have access to those best international products whatever they might be then we become uncompetitive. I think that would be a great challenge for New Zealand. So that's one of the—well that is the reason I think this bill has got such a lot of value to New Zealand.Just going back to those Budgets of old and if you think about subsidy on 245-T for example I can think of at least Bill Rowling and Rob Muldoon both of whom as finance Ministers approved those sort of subsidies. Those days are long gone but none the less it is necessary for us in New Zealand to encourage the use of the right type of product and also to encourage the use of product that we can later justify in the international marketplace. That's why I refer to the things like 245-T because at the time those products were perfectly legitimate and they were they were accepted as being products that would do no harm in the future. I don't know whether the work had been done on those products but none the less they were products we used and that's how life seems to evolve. We go through stages where things that are perfectly acceptable later on in life become unacceptable. I think that it's hugely important for the science behind the work that the EPA does to be as good as you can get at the time. Of course science evolves as well. One product that comes to mind for me that was mentioned by the Greens speaker earlier is per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) which we thought was a perfectly legitimate product to New Zealand. It was used in firefighting and all sorts of I guess community-good projects. Now we find it contaminates water supplies. So that's how things evolve and change. I guess at the time PFAS was introduced for example we didn't understand the potential damage it might do; we now do. So the world changes quickly. So it's important that not only is the EPA able to use the best information available worldwide but it's also able I guess to fund the work that it needs to do and clearly they've got a mechanism in place to do that.I have great faith in the EPA. I have great faith in the HSNO Act and I think that bringing it to the House is probably—well it's not probably I think it's certainly—very good for New Zealand. I hope the discussion that happens in the select committee is constructive I'm sure it will be and that we get this bill passed as quickly as possible. Thank you Madam Speaker.