10. SHANE ARDERN (National—Taranaki-King Country) Link to this
to the Minister for Biosecurity
Does he have confidence in Biosecurity New Zealand; if not, why not?
Hon JIM ANDERTON (Minister for Biosecurity) Link to this
Yes; as I have already noted today in the House, New Zealand has some of the toughest biosecurity and GM-related controls in the world.
Why, then, despite severe criticism 7 months ago from the Auditor-General on staff training, does this latest GM corn breach show that little progress has been made in this area?
Biosecurity New Zealand, as with all Government ministries, carries out a continuous training programme for key staff. An investigation has been commenced into the errors that were made on this occasion. I have to say that biosecurity staff at the border take their role very seriously. Their work is extremely challenging, given the difficulties in relation to conflicting test results and potentially tiny amounts of possible contamination. Anyone, of course, is capable of making a mistake, even political parties in their consecutive and regular choices of new leaders.
Madam SPEAKERIf the Minister has confidence in Biosecurity New Zealand, then why did he go against its recommendation to eradicate the varroa bee mite in the Nelson area, when a paper released under the Official Information Act stated that an attempt at eradication would have an 80 percent chance of success?
Because when I put a question to the scientific advisers in Biosecurity New Zealand and the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry as to the possibility and chance of varroa bee mite reoccurring in the Nelson region or in the South Island, the answer from the scientists was that it would be inevitable. There is nothing about the word “inevitable” that I do not understand.
Will funding be an issue in the eradication of the GE-contaminated corn, given that the same paper released under the Official Information Act demonstrated that funding was a significant factor in the Minister’s decision not to go ahead with an attempted eradication of the varroa bee mite despite an 80 percent chance of success?
We are confronted with a wide range of possible biosecurity incursions, coming from half a million containers, 4 million tourists, the wind, the sea washing on our shores, and the inevitable millions of possible incursions arising from those factors. The expenditure on the saltmarsh mosquito programme this year was $11.5 million, $4.5 million was spent just in terms of management of the varroa bee mite, and $12 million was spent on didymo, Styela, and painted apple moth. In addition $76 million was spent on pre-border and border management. If the member wants an unlimited budget for biosecurity, before he ever gets near the Treasury benches he should have some discussion with National’s spokesperson on finance and see how that works.
In the light of that answer, given that 1.8 tonnes of contaminated seed made its way across the border and given the big long list of other incursions the Minister just read out, such as didymo in the South Island—
—which is now in 26 rivers, will the Minister give the House an assurance today that funding will not be a problem in the eradication of the GE corn incursion?
Of course, funding is not a problem in this incursion, because the funding required would be rather small in comparison with some of the other figures I have worked out. But I can assure the House that I will not be taking advice from the member. He advised me, in terms of didymo in the South Island, to nuke the rivers; I have not taken that advice, either.
Has the Minister or his ministry looked at the issue of compensation for farmers who may be affected by the planting of this corn if he or the ministry is going to destroy it?
The issue of compensation is always on the table when Biosecurity New Zealand takes action to protect New Zealand on biosecurity issues that are not the fault of the owners of property who might have goods or services confiscated. Biosecurity New Zealand will be looking at that as this matter evolves.