Labour has ‘genocide’ term purged from debate

WELLINGTON: Labour is being accused of ‘‘softening’’ language around treatment of the Uighur minority in China after having the term ‘‘genocide’’ removed from a parliamentary debate today.

Act New Zealand had originally requested Parliament debate whether human rights abuses in the Chinese region of Xinjiang amounted to genocide, and in turn call on the Government to fulfil its obligations under international law.

The motion, filed by deputy leader and foreign affairs spokeswoman Brooke van Velden last week, needed the support of each MP in the House in order to be debated.

Ms Van Velden had sought support from the business committee yesterday for it to be placed up the order paper to be raised in the House today.

Speaking after the committee meeting, Ms van Velden said the motion had been approved but changes had to be made to get crossparty consensus.

She could not release the full wording until today at 9am, but confirmed the term ‘‘genocide’’ had been removed.

‘‘The Government was opposed to the word genocide,’’ Ms van Velden said.

‘‘It’s a sad state of affairs that we need to soften our language to debate the hard issues.

‘‘It is disappointing. I still believe acts of genocide are taking place but it is more important for us be able to have the debate on human rights abuses than not have a debate at all.’’

Act would continue to use the term genocide, she said.

Earlier yesterday, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern reiterated her concern over ‘‘grave human rights abuses’’, but voiced caution over the specific term genocide.

There were international laws and requirements around the definition, she said, but any decision would not undermine their current position on human rights abuses, which was ‘‘very strong’’, and the need to investigate what was happening independently.

Trade and Export Growth Minister Damien O’Connor acknowledged any declaration would have an impact on trade relations between the countries.

National leader Judith Collins said her party needed to discuss the matter in caucus, while calling on the Government to provide MPs with all information it holds about the situation.

Asked if New Zealand should follow the lead of allies, including Britain, the United States and Canada, who have all accused China of committing genocide, Ms Collins said New Zealand was a ‘‘sovereign nation and we should make our own decisions’’.

The effect on trade would be the ‘‘elephant in the room’’ around any decision, she said.

About 30% New Zealand of trade went to China, she said.

The Green party was the only other party to have come out in support of the original motion. — The New Zealand Herald

WELLINGTON: A round of new Chinese Government food safety audits which have spooked New Zealand’s primary export sectors have been completed on apple exporters and formal findings are expected within a few weeks.

The video, or live, audits of processing operations approved to export food to China have already resulted in some seafood exports being halted by Chinese officials. The February suspensions of some Sanford and Sealord products are still in force and unresolved.

The Meat Industry Association, which represents companies in the $9 billion export meat industry, last week expressed ‘‘nervousness’’ about the audits amid uncertainty over China’s rules and requirements.

The Ministry for Primary Industries, which is handling the seafood suspension issue with Chinese officials, alerted the meat and dairy export sectors to the audits earlier this year.

Ministry director market access Steve Ainsworth said six apple export operations were audited — a mix of orchards and packhouses in the Hawke’s Bay and Tasman regions.

‘‘We expect to receive the formal findings from the audit within the next month.’’

Pipfruit industry advocate NZ Apples and Pears chief executive Alan Pollard declined to comment until the audit results were in.

The export apple and pear sector earned just over $900 million last year. China is its thirdbiggest market.

The MPI has played down the audits, Mr Ainsworth last week saying ‘‘they’re part of the normal interactions between the regulators of different countries and include providing assurances the systems used to produce and export food products are robust’’.

For three months the ministry’s only statement when asked about the ongoing suspensions was that it was engaging with Chinese officials.

However, sectors are on edge. ‘‘There’s a lot of nervousness,’’ Meat Industry Association (MIA) chief executive Sirma Karapeeva said.

‘‘The structure of the audits is quite different to what we are used to and it’s caused a lot of nervousness. We are all looking at what is going on with the seafood exports, and now apples.’’

A major primary sector participant who spoke on condition of anonymity said all primary industry companies with approvals to export to China were ‘‘nervous’’.

‘‘These [audits] could mark a change of direction, higher standards etc, and there’s little advance clarity what China expects . . . You could be delisted for not meeting a rule or standard that you didn’t know existed.

‘‘There are lots of inconsistent messages from Chinese customers, different port authorities, regulators of what’s required. Dairy, meat, seafood, horticulture are all in the same basket.’’ — The New Zealand Herald