🧪 EXPERIMENTAL / ALPHA — this is an independent prototype, not an official record. Data may be incomplete or wrong - always check the linked Hansard source before relying on it.
Hot Air

Tuesday, 2 May 2006

Amended Answers to Oral Questions — Question No. 11 to Minister, 4 April

HansardID: c31da411-e593-4f61-8131-88116c7ed977
Back to debates
🗣️ Speech Hon Jim Anderton (Jim Anderton's Progressive Coalition — Member for Wigram)
Time unknown

In my answer to a supplementary question on 4 April I referred to the independent group of 10 scientists who had peer reviewed Biosecurity New Zealand’s risk analysis covering the importation of honey from Australia and the Pacific Islands, and I stated that “all vouched for the fact that we have the most minimal amount of risk involved in it.” From the advice I had received I concluded that this was the case. However, I have subsequently been advised that one of the 10 scientists disagreed with Biosecurity New Zealand’s approach for managing the identified risks. I am informed, however, that the other nine scientists, when reviewing the parts of the document relevant to their expertise, did not express disagreement with the analysis, and that Biosecurity New Zealand therefore remains satisfied that the risk analysis is robust.

🗣️ Spoke in this debate (1)