Organic Products and Production Bill

on behalf of the Minister of Agriculture: I present to the House a legislative statement on the Organic Products and Production Bill.

ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): That legislative statement is published under the authority of the House and can be found on the Parliament website.

Hon DAVID PARKER: I move, That the Organic Products and Production Bill be now read a third time.

Can I begin by thanking everyone who’s worked hard to get this to the point that it is—there has been a lot of work on this. It’s quite a large bill; this was evidenced by the number of parts. The Primary Production Committee did a lot of work knocking it into shape.

Can I acknowledge the useful feedback received from stakeholders during the development of this bill over the past three years. There’s probably only one negative in this for me, in that it’s probably the end of the series of puns that we had through the years from the Hon James Shaw as he asked the Leader of the House about progress on the stalled Organic Products Bill, but they got increasingly bad, and so I’m pleased to see that we are “moo-ving” on. Ha, ha!

We’ve delivered a bill to increase consumer confidence in purchasing organic products. This will improve outcomes for businesses making organic claims because they can be more confident that they will be recognised and that they’re meeting the required standards. Through this, we also facilitate international trade in organic products. It’s an important growth area for New Zealand, with over half of our organic produce now being exported overseas. Our major trading partners such as the US and the EU increasingly expect others to have an organics regulatory system that produces similar outcomes to their own. I understand that there’s—I think—a 2026 deadline in respect of exports into Europe. If we didn’t pass this legislation by then we would be creating problems for our organic exporters. Therefore, features of the bill meet these international expectations, and this supports our participation in international trade now and into the future.

The intent of the bill is threefold. This is set out in the purpose clause of the bill: firstly, consistency in making organic claims, requiring businesses who make organic claims to meet consistent organic standards and be approved by the relevant ministry. In that regard, I would record a question from Barbara Kuriger and Mark Cameron about the need to have exemptions for small operators who are, effectively, selling into farmers markets and things. I am assured by the ministry that they intend that there be class exemptions available so that we are not over-regulating that space.

But secondly, the bill supports organic businesses by making it clearer what they have to do to be able to make organic claims. These requirements will be set through secondary legislation. As I said during the committee stage, we’re actually very good at this in New Zealand. It is probably one of the best areas that we perform—in a regulatory sense—relative to other parts of the world, because we’ve had to, for the reasons that I explained during that debate. There are lots of steps in that process to make sure that the regulations are fit for purpose because they are complex, and you can get them wrong if you’re not careful. So those safeguards are set out in the legislation.

Then finally, as I’ve already said, this provides a strong foundation for our participation in the international trade of organic products. To put that into some financial scale, I’m advised that—I think it was 2022, it may be a year or two earlier—the organics industry estimated that their export values were $723 million each year. That will increase in part through this, but it was increasing anyway. This will help it grow even more. So you can see it’s closing in on a billion dollars of exports. So it’s an important part of our export economy, and therefore supports the standard of living that we need in this country by selling products to the rest of the world in order to pay for the things that we don’t produce, like cars and computers that we import from overseas. The flexibility of the enabling regime will ensure that incumbent products or sector-specific organisation regulation is workable, robust, and enduring. I commend the bill to the House.

The question is that the motion be agreed to.

It’s an absolute pleasure to be standing here this morning on the third reading of the Organic Products Bill. The bill goes back a long way, not just in this Parliament but I can remember when I first came here almost nine years ago, we had people like Brendan Hoare and others who presented to us and had been asking for a long time for some protection and some standards around organic products. And I know, myself, as an organic farmer—although my daughter and her husband, Rachel and Kenneth, take all the credit for the transition and certification around that—that there are a lot of countries that expect a different compliance level, and there’s lots and lots of different audits that go on, and it would be really, really good to have one standard in New Zealand where we can say, “All organics comply to this level”. Then, if a particular country wants something a little different, well, it’s up to them then to ask for it.

I also wanted to mention this morning the Hon James Shaw. His persistence has been remarkable in terms of every Thursday afternoon that this House has sat, actually standing up and asking where the organic products bill was on the Order Paper. We almost got through it at the last segment of urgency back before Christmas and didn’t quite make it, so it’s very good to be here today.

So the organic sector—as the Minister said—has been rapidly growing and is growing and there’s more and more interest in it as time goes on. And, you know, we do have a lot of vegetables in this country—fruit and vegetables, largely. Dairy, meat, and wool combined actually make up quite a lot in agriculture, and then processed food. And I will make a note of the recent announcement. So, in our situation, the farms are supplying Fonterra, and the current milk price forecast for conventional milk production is currently at $8.50, and the forecast for organic milk production is $10.80. So it does give an indication that there is a demand growing for organic product—it’s something that’s been sitting at a level in the early days, and over the last few years it has been growing and growing and growing to a point where we are starting to get a good name for ourselves in organics as well as our other food production in conventional ways; we do it in the market. As the Minister mentioned, we are very good at food safety and we are very good at producing food, not just for our own people but for export.

So I do want to note, as the Minister did, that we did have some concerns. So I think back to the last Parliament, where the Hon Kiri Allan and I were on the Primary Production Committee and we spent a lot of time working through submissions on this. So it does take me back to what’s been going on for a very long time—and, as the Minister said, the concerns of some of the smaller suppliers are not so much the major exporting groups but the smaller suppliers and the farmers markets didn’t want the regulatory system to cost them out of the market, because what happens when products come on board is that it’s normally those smaller providers and growers who actually pave the way, and so we would really stifle some of our start-ups and some of our growth in organic if we costed those people out of the system. So it’s good that the Minister and the ministry are cognisant of that.

So, having said that, I don’t know whether there’s a whole lot more to say this morning—I’m just very keen to get this bill passed and get it going. It’s actually taken a very long time, but very proud to be standing here today and I have great pleasure in commending it to the House. Thank you.

It’s my pleasure to take a call on the Organic Products and Production Bill. The bill will create consistency for making organic claims and increase consumer confidence by enabling mandatory requirements for any product represented as organic. Requiring businesses who make organic claims to meet a consistent organic standard and be approved by a relevant ministry will ensure our domestic consumers and trading partners that our system is robust.

The Organic Products and Production Bill establishes a basis for mandatory organic standards in New Zealand, and this will increase consumer confidence in purchasing organic products, increase certainty for businesses making organic claims, and facilitate international trade of organic products. The bill establishes standards for organic products and production, and introduces a way to monitor compliance with these standards. It will set out a framework for the organic system and regulations, and it will set out what organic businesses need to do in order for their products to become organic.

Currently, certification agencies provide a verification and assessment service, as well as a final peer review of all paperwork and processes for a business, before issuing certification. Under the bill, the relevant ministry will undertake this final peer review step and give approval. All other verification and assessment activities will remain the role of recognised entities, very similar to the current practice.

Some might be asking “Why is the term ‘organic’ not defined in the bill?” The bill, as introduced, did not have a definition for “organic product”. However, to reduce the confusion over what “organic” is, the Primary Production Committee amended the bill to define an organic product as a product that was produced by an operator in compliance with the relevant standard. The Supplementary Order Paper rephrases this, for clarity, but the definition of organic remains linked to the standard.

This bill aims to increase consumer confidence when purchasing organic products and allow businesses to assert certifiable organic production, both domestically and internationally. The bill brings New Zealand practices in line with the way that our major trading partners already regulate organic products, and this will assist us in growing our organic industry exports, currently estimated at around $500 million per year. For that reason, I commend the bill to the House.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. It’s a pleasure to take a call here in the final reading of the Organic Products and Production Bill. Look, we’ve heard some of the nuts and bolts about it. For me, ultimately, it’s about having greater confidence for consumers here in New Zealand but also internationally, when we rely so heavily on exporting our fantastic food and fibre products. This is a significant opportunity for us to enhance our reputation in the market to give greater confidence to those consumers, and so of course it’s appropriate to take that where we can, with the caveat to that being what the potential cost is to implement it and the impact it may have on participants within the organics industry.

So, look, on the balance of it, that is a concern of mine, but I think we have managed to mitigate that risk and the concerns, particularly around exemptions for the local farmers market. I think that is in a pretty good place, and acknowledging the Minister’s comments as well—there were some terrible puns there. But for the farmers markets, we just have to make sure that they’re not getting in a pickle and coming up with any difficult situations. So I think we’ve created a way to get them out of a jam, and enable them to get on and meet the needs of what they are trying to do. So, hopefully, they won’t have any beef with us, and we’ll just be able to get on with passing this legislation. I seem to be getting lambasted with comments across the House now, but—

Hon Dr David Clark: There’s going to be egg on your face.

ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): Stop it!

TIM VAN DE MOLEN: —ultimately—oh, the egg on a face. Well, I was going to come up with some egg jokes—yolks—but I couldn’t really think of any. But, anyway, I know I’m cracking you up.

Right, I think that’s just about enough. It’s the will of the industry here to get on with this bill, so I don’t think we need to hold it up any more.

Hon James Shaw: Milk it.

TIM VAN DE MOLEN: Perhaps I am milking it—yes—but, ultimately, it’s a good piece of legislation. It’s appropriate to bring this forward for a critical part of our food and fibre sector. We want to enhance that where we can. It’s a good opportunity, of course. The caveat remains around the regulatory aspect and the detail coming out there, so we need to make sure that industry is included with that to get the right outcome for them. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. The pressure is on to come up with some peachy little produce pun. I’ll leave that there.

It is a great pleasure to rise and take a call on this third reading. It’s already been noted that this thing’s been around longer than some of us in this House, and that it’s a worthy bill to be getting through. I just want to note that this bill is about supporting producers and consumers who are trying to build a thriving and sustainable future. A little shout-out: part of the electorate that I live in is a hotbed of organic producers—in Raglan—and they are leading the world. We’ve got exporters in Raglan like the Raglan Food Company.

Barbara Kuriger: That’s right.

ANGELA ROBERTS: Yep, Barbara and I, you know, we’ve enjoyed their yoghurt. They are doing the right thing, they are world class in their standards, they’re living wage employers, all sorts of things like that, and they’re being protected by this bill and supported to do the right thing. Consumer confidence; being able to have a register where we can go and be better informed so that we can make great decisions about supporting these producers. We’ve heard about how important organics are becoming in our global story as exporters, and we have to make sure that in such a rapidly growing environment we’ve got the structures in place so that they can go in confidence to the world. And we’re supporting them to do that; it’s a wonderful thing.

So it’s great to hear the recognition of the concerns of my neighbours who sell me my produce on a Sunday morning at the local farmers market. It sounds like, you know, we’ve really been able to address those concerns and it means that we can really look after consumers and producers to be sustainable. That’s an exciting place to be. I commend this bill to the House.

You know, as the old guy in those cheese ads used to say, “Good things take time.” This is so important that I’m wearing a tie. It’s a big day in the House, and it is a day that this House has anticipated for a long, long, long time. But don’t panic, go organic. Many members of this House—that was Teanau’s joke, by the way. Many members of this House, I think, have queried of their own volition, with entirely pure motives, when we might perhaps finally reach the third reading of this esteemed, storied piece of legislation. I think it is fair to say that the Green Party has waited even longer than most of those in the 53rd Parliament. On the first day that Parliament sat this millennium, Jeanette Fitzsimons stood in this House and challenged the Government of the day to, and I quote, “achieve the high value added economy by becoming a centre of excellence in organic growing and in the science that underpins it”. That was 23 years ago. Even if some organic crops do take a little bit longer to grow without intensive production, they don’t take as long as it has taken for us to pass a law in this place. And we are under urgency, but of course this bill has still taken us five years.

I digress, it is a day to celebrate. Because now we are finally here passing a bill that will take us a step closer to the goal that Jeanette set the Clark Government in the year 2000. So, Madam Speaker, you will not be surprised to learn that the Green Party could not be happier. It is a change that has, shall we say, not been without struggle to achieve—the bill has taken nearly five years to reach this point, but it was precipitated by very strong work well before then from the organic sector. It turns out that winning people over does take time. I want to specifically mention the work of Organics Aotearoa New Zealand, OANZ, because their advocacy for the benefits of organics has had a real impact on legitimising the push for healthier and more sustainable forms of farming in Aotearoa New Zealand.

I do want to just mark a couple of things that have put us on the journey here, one of which was actually in 2005, in the post-election negotiations, when Jeanette Fitzsimons negotiated for $3 million to go to the organic sector to kind of start to sort of lay the groundwork and to provide a more professional service to farmers as well. Now, I have to say, I would probably at least add a zero if I was in that situation today. But, you know, as we said, it kind of started small and it started a long time ago, but it’s really taken an effect.

There have been a number of other kind of key points along the way. So, I think it was in 2013, OANZ said, “Well, actually, we do need a regulatory environment to underpin this.”—so that was 10 years ago—and formed a regulation working group and established terms of reference and kind of got the ball rolling, essentially, on where we are today. In 2015, they produced their position paper on why we needed to regulate that and matched it up with the Ministry for Primary Industries’ smart regulation approach at the time, under the previous National Government. And so that, again, started to align the interests of the sector with where the regulatory approach was going.

In 2016, there of course was the launch of the organic markets report at Parliament, which was backed by our spokesperson Steffan Browning at the time, and Damien O’Connor, the Labour Party’s agricultural spokesperson at the time—and I just want to thank Damien again for his support over the years for this. I think that was significant because it really helped to underpin the confidence in the sector that this was the right way to go, with that market study. And then that led to the presentation to the Primary Production Committee and started the ball rolling. Until eventually, in 2018, the OANZ forum, which the then Minister Damien O’Connor attended and affirmed his support. And that kind of got us into the beginning of this process.

So it was, you know, 10 years ago—more than 10 years ago now, actually—that that first report on the economic potential of the sector came out. And there has been a huge amount of work that’s been done since to build the case on this bill, but also on myriad other reports—on strategies and on research and so on. Organic Farm New Zealand, Te Waka Kai Ora, and many others that I won’t list here have played their part too. But I do want to mention some individuals in particular: Chris Morrison, Viv Williams, Brendon Hoare, as well as my Green colleagues Sue Kedgley, Steffan Browning, Eugenie Sage, Gareth Hughes, and Teanau Tuiono who have put their work into this over the years.

So I’ll just say some brief comments about the content of the legislation. You know, obviously others have said quite a lot about it. It does, at its heart, a relatively simple thing: it enables the implementation of organic standards for Aotearoa New Zealand. But that fairly simple thing has the potential to do so much for the prominence and the success of the sector and, of course, now regenerative organics production in New Zealand. OANZ’s sector strategy that was released in 2012 said that there is the potential to add $4.7 billion in what they call “better growth” to our economy by the year 2030. And the strategy identifies this bill—soon, very soon, to be the Act—as a key tool for formalising and maintaining the organic trade arrangements.

I want to just shout out to Barbara Kuriger for her intervention earlier here in the third reading, just talking about the premium that the organic sector has over the kind of regular commodity or more intensive production systems. For Aotearoa New Zealand, which has so aggressively adopted moving away from just volume and towards value and towards values—particularly in those high-end markets that we are participating in and aspire to participate more in—this bill actually becomes a really important economic underpinning of that entire strategy. So I actually have great hopes for it. There are other jurisdictions around the world that we have looked at where once there was a set of nationwide standards in place in the regulatory environment, and the organic sector actually quadrupled, in some cases. So that really does start to offer our farmers and producers some alternatives and some real economic options for less intensive, more environmentally friendly, healthier, but also more valuable forms of production.

So by incentivising those cleaner forms of farming, the organic sector really does have the potential here to do so much for the things that we truly value here in this country: for our waterways, for our land, for our climate, for our people. Other nations are well ahead of us in recognising the potential—as we formalise the free-trade agreement with the European Union, it’s worth making note that they have a target of 25 percent of all agricultural land in organics by 2030. This one bill won’t be a silver bullet for us, but we do need to take a range of actions to reduce the environmental impacts and to cut pollution. We’ve known that for a very, very long time and there remains a long road ahead. But this is a really important part of our pathway there.

It is high time that we truly recognise the contribution that organics can make to this journey and it is high time that we get on and pass this bill. I had hoped—I would have loved it if Jeanette could have been here to witness its final passage through the House, but as I said before, good things take time. Ngā mihi, Madam Speaker.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. It’s a pleasure to stand on behalf of ACT and speak to the Organic Products and Production Bill. I’d just like to just voice our concern and disappointment in the voting down of the Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) in Mark Cameron’s name, SOP 309. Our concern is around this one-size-fits-all policy that doesn’t allow for the discretion for smaller businesses. The SOP was seeking clarity for the smaller operators, the farmers, the growers in the organics markets place, and especially to those who are just selling in the weekend or selling their excess products just to get a little bit of extra money to get by. And whilst we are in a cost of living crisis at the moment, where people are struggling for the basics and people are trying to just make a little bit extra or go that little extra mile to make their life a little bit more comfortable, we feel that this one-size-fits-all approach goes against these smaller players.

Whilst I appreciate the Minister gave some explanation and appreciated our concern around this and said that he didn’t feel it was the intention of the bill to capture those people, the clarity just wasn’t there. And so the SOP was to seek clarity around that for these suppliers. So we appreciate that a convention around the certification that is internationally recognised in organic product space is necessary for some in the industry moving forward—for example, organics exporters and large commercial operators. But the bureaucracy and the added cost to smaller organic producers would arguably outweigh many of the benefits, if not all, of going to those Saturday morning markets or their neighbourhood markets.

The ACT Party always feels that somebody should stand up for the small-business owners and be there and be their voice. That’s what we’ve been doing, and that’s what we will continue to do. So whether it’s for the farmer or rural communities or equality in the urban-centric environment lens, small to medium sized enterprises, we will always try to stand up for the smaller business. We think the SOP struck the needed balance to address the disparities that we were worried about within this bill.

ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): Order! I’m just going to ask the member, at this third reading, it is not the time to traverse in depth either matters that were raised at the committee of the whole House stage or what another party might do in the place of this bill.

KAREN CHHOUR: Well, allowing for greater access to global markets and big producers and making surety for smaller businesses is what we were looking to do.

So, in the end, we saw that we just couldn’t have the confidence that this would work for everybody. That’s why ACT cannot support this bill in the third reading. We believe it doesn’t strike the balance between the large commercialised operators in the industry and the mum and dad farmers and growers that often just supply them to make a little bit extra in the weekends. So ACT just can’t support this bill.

I declare the House in committee for consideration of the Fire and Emergency New Zealand (Levy) Amendment Bill.