Estimates Debate — Vote Agriculture and Forestry

It hurts me, as a non-member of the Government, to say that New Zealand First supports the changes that have been made in Vote Agriculture and Forestry, because for too long this extremely important ministry, the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, has languished. It has been the victim of change after change and of far too much fragmentation. It has long been a concern of the Primary Production Committee that the ministry could not respond in time—and it has proved to be so—to incursions of pests from overseas and to problems within this country because of relying on outside contractors for, in our view, far too much of its service. We support the moves that have been made, because that issue is now being addressed. We are seeing the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry taking a lead role amongst the other areas of ministry it is responsible for, such as biosecurity, and it is advising on trade and research for and on behalf of the Government. We are very pleased to see that happening, because it is bringing a focus back into this most important ministry.

One cannot explain more clearly the importance of this ministry without mentioning one part of it—the dairy industry—that provides, give or take, 25 percent of New Zealand’s exports. This industry went through massive change in the restructuring of its boards. I was a member of the committee that looked at the restructuring of the producer boards. I am pleased and proud to say that I was a strong advocate of the cooperative model that has been adopted by Fonterra, and I reaffirm tonight my belief in the cooperative model. I believe that Fonterra is producing the results we expected of it. I am proud to say that I was one of the few who predicted a great future for Fonterra, and the move has been seen to be the right one.

I was also delighted—and I did not expect this to happen—to see Vote Food Safety included under the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry rather than the Ministry of Health. I know that not all of my colleagues would have been as pleased as I was to see that happen, but I think that is where it should be. The food process starts at the farm. Recently we saw on television a much publicised event where mice were found in vegetables from Australia, under the McCain brand. I suppose I did not need to mention the brand, but it was the McCain brand. That happened in agriculture—out in the paddocks and the cornfields—but, ultimately, the food ends up on people’s plates, sustaining the population. It is the checks, the food security, and the food safety that make sure that mice, rats tails, or other gremlins, do not end up on one’s plate. I would like to think that what happened to that food in Australia could not, or would not, happen in New Zealand—and I hope I am not proved wrong by the next television programme I see when I get home.

I am very pleased to see Vote Food Safety under the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry. That is where it should be. We can go from the pasture to the plate or from the cornfield to the cornflakes—one or the other—but I think that if it were under Vote Health, the focus would be different.

Vote agreed to.

Vote Biosecurity—Agriculture and Forestry agreed to.

Vote Biosecurity—Conservation agreed to.

Vote Biosecurity—Fisheries agreed to.

Vote Biosecurity—Health agreed to.

Vote Education