Annual Review Debate — Primary Sector

Thank you, Madam Chair. It’s a pleasure to speak in this debate. It was a very illuminating session which the Primary Production Committee had when we had our annual review process. I want to start with the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI), who was probably the biggest part of our annual review sessions. There was one really important thing that came out of that meeting, and that was that the ministry had been working on a levy for farmers. This levy was going to be a new biosecurity levy that was in addition to what farmers already pay. So farmers already pay through their industry organisations funds to the Government for biosecurity.

💬 Hon Tracey Martin: Are you sure you’re in the right year? You’re sure you’re in the right place?

Now we all heard what a great Government we have that was going to give money around the M. bovis outbreak, and I’m just referring to the review of the Biosecurity Act that is on page 6 of the annual review of MPI.

The question to the CEO of MPI was “Will there be a levy that your organisation is investigating?”, and he said yes—he said yes in the committee. Then within half an hour of that committee ending we had an email from the Minister’s office to the ministry basically telling them to retract from what they said in that committee meeting. That is completely against—

CHAIRPERSON (Poto Williams): Can I call the member—

💬 Kieran McAnulty: I raise a point of order, Madam Chair.

CHAIRPERSON (Poto Williams): Just a moment, I can deal with this.

—what happened in the committee.

CHAIRPERSON (Poto Williams): Can I just call the member to order. As chairman of the select committee, you are to report back to the committee according to the reports. It is to be a non-political discussion.

Yes. And that’s why I’m reporting the facts of what happened in that meeting when the CEO was asked directly are they investigating a new levy, and he said yes—that was his exact words. He said “Yes, we are.” Then the department came back to the committee later to change their opinion. Farmers out there need to be aware of what that actually means. That means that this Government isn’t putting the money up for M. bovis, they’re actually going to—

CHAIRPERSON (Poto Williams): Yip. Can I just—

—charge farmers for that over time. And that was an important part of the MPI one.

Another part of the MPI one was the one billion trees programme. Now we have this and there’s a grant to landowners. Now, one of the issues raised was that the particular loss of jobs for that transition from farming—you know, that could be in dairying, it could be sheep and beef—going into forestry. It was said that there would be a thousand jobs that could potentially be created from the one billion trees programme.

💬 Kieran McAnulty: I raise a point of order, Madam Chair. You gave the member a very clear directive, and in my view he is absolutely trifling with that directive because he is ignoring everything that you’ve asked him to do.

CHAIRPERSON (Poto Williams): I tend to agree with you. I have asked this to be a non-political report back to the committee from the select committee.

And I’m just reading what was said here, that the billion dollar programme would create one thousand jobs.

CHAIRPERSON (Poto Williams): But take my direction in how you present this report back to the committee.

OK. So thank you, Madam Chair. So that positive issue for the one billion trees programme would be the jobs created. But then there’s the potential loss of jobs of the land use change there. We heard about them in committee. When we reflect on that, it’s interesting to relate that back to another part of our committee hearings which was around Land Information New Zealand (LINZ). So we had LINZ come in front of the committee as well, and that was really interesting because they talked about the approvals for the sale of sensitive land. If you want to refer to page 3 of their report, it will go through that for you. Ninety-four approvals given; that’s a 96 percent approval rate under this Government for applications to LINZ. We knew that New Zealand First had come into this House in the election campaign saying that they would stop foreign investment. Billions of dollars. It says here, “We noted overseas investment had risen by over a billion dollars and sales at gross value by over $2 billion from the previous year.” This is a Government that was going to stop foreign investment, and they have increased it by $2 billion.

There is no consistency in that approach, and that’s one of the things that we have seen in recent weeks.

CHAIRPERSON (Poto Williams): Order! Was that reported back from the committee?

Yes, I’ve got it here—page 3, if you want to have a look.

CHAIRPERSON (Poto Williams): OK. Just for clarity.

Page 3—it says there, in the second to last paragraph, that gross value had risen by over $2 billion since the previous calendar year, since this Government had come into being. When we consider that, that’s about a 96 percent approval rate. Then when we look at some of the things that weren’t approved—it’s really hard to see how in some cases, like we had last week where the Associate Minister of Finance approved a deal and then the Minister disapproved a deal on her behalf, saying that a $350 million investment is not of economic value to this country. We have seen an over $2 billion increase in investment, and yet a $350 million investment on 178 hectares in Waihi was not considered to be of economic value. That shows the inconsistency of the New Zealand First Party and the approach of the Green Party.

It’s a privilege to be able to stand and give a contribution this afternoon on the 2017/18 annual review of the Ministry for Primary Industries as the deputy chair of the select committee. I must say, before I turn to my remarks about the actual annual review, it’s been an ongoing disappointment to operate in a—

💬 Kieran McAnulty: I raise a point of order, Madam Chair. I apologise to my colleague but I know she won’t mind. The role of a chair, as you have ruled, is to outline in neutral terms what is in a select committee’s report. I’ve just checked, and the speeches that are allocated to chairs of select committees are not a part of the allocations given to parties. Given the nature of that speech by Hon David Bennett, I would ask you to reflect on whether that should be included in the allocation.

I think that one of the challenges that we’ve had in our select committee has been that we haven’t been able to really give due consideration to some of the matters that impact all of our communities. Now, I know that there’s a ton of rural members of Parliament over that side of the House; there’s a ton on this side. Basically, our task as members, whether it’s in Opposition or as part of the Government, is to give due consideration, review the substantive matters that come before us, and, where we can, work to create better laws and refine the policies and really put our colleagues that are working within these ministries to task.

So it’s been challenging because of the behaviour of the chair more frequently than not that we have been unable to get to the real ngako, as we’d say, or the issues that are before us, because what I want to talk about is the role that the Ministry for Primary Industries has played in the last year. They have played an absolutely incredible role for all of our communities, both on that side of the House and on our side of the House, in responding to a whole range of issues. In particular, I want to acknowledge the work that they’ve done in the area of biosecurity.

Biosecurity has presented a number of challenges for our rural communities and also for our trade and export markets. We’ve had the incursion of the brown marmorated stink bug. We’ve had, obviously, the ongoing and very challenging Mycoplasma bovis. For both of those biosecurity incursions, what the Ministry for Primary Industries, under the leadership of the Minister for primary industries, Hon Damien O’Connor, has been required to do is work closely and collegially with industry and the key components of our primary sector.

Now, the way that we go about doing that is not by giving ranging, rampant political debates and turning everything into a political point-scoring football to kick around. It’s actually by turning to how we can work together to ensure that our people within our communities who are supporting the backbones of our industries are being protected and provided for. So, look, I hope that we can change the tone of the debate a little bit tonight when it comes to the way that we consider our primary industries—

I apologise to the member. The time has come for me to report progress.

Debate interrupted.

House resumed.

The Chairperson reported the Ngā Rohe Moana o Ngā Hapū o Ngāti Porou Bill (No 2) with amendment and progress on the Appropriation (2017/18 Confirmation and Validation) Bill.

Report adopted.

The House adjourned at 9.56 p.m.