9. Dr RUSSEL NORMAN (Co-Leader—Green) Link to this
to the Prime Minister
Does he stand by his statement to Federated Farmers that “regardless of your view about the environment or climate change, the opinions of your consumers will ultimately decide how well your products sell”; if so, does he share Fonterra’s reported concern that factory farms could tarnish New Zealand’s reputation for free-range dairy products?
Hon JOHN KEYDoes he agree that New Zealand’s competitive advantage for dairy exports exists because our dairy cows are pastoral—they eat grass and live outdoors—and that therefore any moves to introduce factory farming of dairy cows in New Zealand are a threat to that priceless economic advantage; if he agrees with that, what is he going to do about it?
Yes. I remind the member that the applications for the types of farms that the member is referring to in his question are currently lodged before Environment Canterbury and that those submissions are open until 18 December. It might also be helpful to point out that the National Animal Welfare Advisory Committee, which advises the Government on these issues, has recently developed a dairy welfare code, which has been through a review process with the interested bodies. The code is yet to be finalised and published, but the Minister of Agriculture advised me that he has asked for urgent advice on this specific issue in relation to that code.
Will his Government use its expanded resource management powers and the new Environmental Protection Authority to call in the resource consent applications for factory farms under section 142 of the Resource Management Act that includes matters that have “… aroused widespread public concern or interest regarding its actual or likely effect on the environment …”; if not, why not?
I have not received any advice that it is the Government’s intention to do that. As I said, the current applications are lodged with Environment Canterbury. We expect a wide range of submissions to be presented to Environment Canterbury by 18 December. We have made it quite clear from the Government’s perspective that we share the concerns that the member has just raised.
Brendon BurnsWhat will the Government’s policies on emissions trading and the $110 billion in subsidies provided to polluters, including corporate dairy farmers, do to reduce such developments as that threatening the Mackenzie Basin and New Zealand’s reputation more widely?
Firstly, I utterly reject the assertion about $110 billion of subsidies. Secondly, when it comes to climate change, assertions are quite correct: the world is heating up, with the exception of Labour, where things are very much cooling down between its leader and its caucus. From our perspective, we will be going to Copenhagen with a very credible position—an emissions trading scheme on the books, which is more, I might add, than Australia has at the moment.
Can the Prime Minister give the House a date by which the Government will decide whether it will call in these applications, which clearly have national significance and the potential to damage New Zealand’s international reputation and our nationally important dairy exports?
No. But, as I said earlier, I can advise that the Minister of Agriculture has asked the National Animal Welfare Advisory Committee for an urgent update on the issues as they relate to the farming of dairy animals in such a way. I think that would be a good starting point.
I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. The Prime Minister may have misunderstood my question. It was not about the National Animal Welfare Advisory Committee; it was about the Resource Management Act process and whether the Government—
Mr SPEAKERIs the Prime Minister aware that, under the changes to the emissions trading scheme, these 18,000 dairy cows will be subsidised by the taxpayer to cover the increase in greenhouse emissions by about $4.5 million between now and 2015, and does he think that the Government’s spending $4.5 million in order to subsidise factory dairy farming, which may damage our international reputation, is a good investment of taxpayer money?
No. I am aware that the member has made a couple of factually incorrect statements. I am also aware that New Zealand, as a large agricultural producer, will play its part in the world in feeding the extra 3.5 billion people who will be on the planet by 2050. I am also aware that the Government is leading the charge for a global alliance to look for solutions when it comes to nitrate or methane emissions. I think in that regard New Zealand can count itself as a world leader when it comes to agriculture and looking for solutions to climate change.
Sue KedgleyIs he aware that animal welfare is an increasingly important consideration for consumers around the world? Why on earth would the Government support a new form of factory farming that will alienate many of our overseas consumers, including those who are attracted to New Zealand dairy products because they are promoted as being free-range and grass-fed?
With due respect to the member, I say that if she listened to my answers she would know that the Government does not support it, and that we have just asked the National Animal Welfare Advisory Committee for an urgent update on what can be done and what the issues are.
In light of the Prime Minister’s answers to this question, can he understand that people right across New Zealand are deeply concerned by this turn of events in the New Zealand dairy sector, that people are looking for the Government to provide some leadership urgently on this issue, that the prevarication so far just is not enough, and that we need a very clear answer one way or the other?
Hon Gerry Brownlee Link to this
I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Where was the question? The member has been told several times the answer to where I think he is heading, so why are we allowing him to persevere in giving what effectively was a speech?
All I can say is that I am sure the Prime Minister is perfectly capable of answering whatever he could find in that by way of a question.