Urgent Debates Declined — Biosecurity Management—Contamination of Imported Palm Kernel Expeller

I have received a letter from the Hon Damien O’Connor seeking to debate under Standing Order 386 the discovery by a New Zealand dairy farmer of the remains of a cloven-hoofed animal in his consignment of imported palm kernel expeller from Malaysia or Indonesia, and the subsequent failure of both the Minister for Primary Industries and his ministry to adequately respond to the issue. This is a particular case of recent occurrence involving ministerial responsibility. However, the ministry’s response to biosecurity risk from the importation of palm kernel is ongoing. The big hurdle to get over in an urgent debate application is whether the matter has reached the stage that the business of the House should be set aside. The test is a high one. An incident has been reported, and the ministry is working with authorities in Malaysia. Further options are being developed for consultation. An urgent debate was held on the ministry’s effectiveness in preparing for, and responding to, biosecurity incursions in New Zealand earlier this year. I am not convinced that I would be justified in setting aside the business of the House again today. The application is therefore declined.

I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I am not wanting in any way to challenge your judgment or ruling on this, but I would seek some clarification on the point of urgency, because if the Speaker considers that the incursion itself is required before an urgent debate is accorded the House, then I would be very concerned. At what point of warning or possible incursion can we consider that biosecurity is an urgent matter? I am not trying to trifle with the House or yourself, Mr Speaker, but it is, indeed, a genuine question. Do we have the ability to debate in the House the risk, or do we have to wait until we have an incursion and then debate the clean-up? This is of utmost importance and the No. 1 issue for primary industries in this country, so I seek your guidance on the point of urgency.

And I have given my guidance to the House in my ruling. I fully accept the points the member is making. Biosecurity is of utmost importance to this country, but in this case my responsibility under Standing Order 386 is to determine whether, because of this particular incident and because of the letter I received from the honourable member, a discussion is required today. I have ruled that that is not the case.