Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Well Humpty Dumpty. We got a communication from MPI confirming the date of our next six monthly RMP audit. All well and good, although I've been told to "zip it" about asking why all of a sudden as 'small time operators' we need two audits a year when we only process honey for six weeks a year and the rest of the time the plant is mothballed.

What kind of makes me falloff the wall is the $1500 fee for four hours work . That's very close to $400 an hour. Where is the justification for that .... the smart glass building in town ?

So if it's good enough for the Goose, then the Gander here will continue to say to the AFB management agency that at $200 an hour for dog surveillance of bee hives they are getting a bargain.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 36
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I'll back it, don't get me wrong I agree with being audited, but for probably the majority of extraction plants operating at most 5-6 months most maybe not not even that, why two?, and agree the hourl

Our buyer of twenty five years dumped us three years ago  to concentrate on low quality manuka, like I suspect he dumped a lot of people. His words ..."why would I buy clover and dew, pay the freight,

Time to say No to twice yearly inspection of honey extraction plants?? How...  some kind of petition? 

What kind of makes me falloff the wall is the $1500 fee for four hours work . That's very close to $400 an hour. Where is the justification for that
Because they can.

 

Part of the reason for Aucklands housing crisis is the cost of building one, and the exhaustive process of red tape cutting that can deter people from trying. To build a house tens of thousands of dollars worth of consents can be required. How can it cost so much? The grey suits who "consult" get charged out in excess of $200 per hour. Why? because they can.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ridiculous isn't it.

But I guess that's just the way it is now.

They come and see us twice and the honey house is pulled apart one of those visits.

 

I don't mind audits too much, I am well used to them from when I worked at quality bakers.

I think they're actually very important, but geez your right they're not cheap, and I personally don't see much point in auditing someone who isn't processing, there's nothing that your not going to see next time.

 

I like being able to extract my own honey, I guess the only other option is doing away with the honey house, and it would cost more than the RMP compliance for contract extraction.

Not that it's my honey house.

But I do plan to build one one day.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree @jamesc, we have had our second one recently, While it went well i was still not impressed with with why we as extractors and storage, need two audits, we should be lucky the new guys need three. what bugs me is, they go though the same questions as when they visited the first time when our plant wasn't running, looking at water articulation, staff training, and few others that really should be once a year questions they could cut the audit time in half. Different for the guys /packers that are running all year round thats what they do sure fair enough. I let the auditor know my thoughts but your talking to the wrong person waste of time, like they will go back and and say beek aren't impressed with the new rules, :what:

So i am not impressed we need two audits its pure rip off, And how do we tell them?

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Yup compliance and testing two of the biggest money makers in beekeeping today.

In lots of industries and local councils and the MOT.

It was a lot cheaper when people were trusted to behave with common sense .

When did we all turn into such deviants that we need constant policing .

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember when they brought in RMP's, we were told that basically you could do whatever you like provided you proved that it was safe but the reality is what they say goes. Mind you back in the day when it was all done by the local authorities one honey house was closed down because the inspector found flying insects on the premises (bees).

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree @jamesc, we have had our second one recently, While it went well i was still not impressed with with why we as extractors and storage, need two audits, we should be lucky the new guys need three. what bugs me is, they go though the same questions as when they visited the first time when our plant wasn't running, looking at water articulation, staff training, and few others that really should be once a year questions they could cut the audit time in half. Different for the guys /packers that are running all year round thats what they do sure fair enough. I let the auditor know my thoughts but your talking to the wrong person waste of time, like they will go back and and say beek aren't impressed with the new rules, :what:

So i am not impressed we need two audits its pure rip off, And how do we tell them?

On the plus side Tony these price structures could be seen as an incentive to drive the industry forward in terms of adding value to our Honey and Honey products.

The more valuable our industry is in terms of export dollars the less significant these seemingly over the top costs become.

Another way to beat these costs is to lower our own costs.

Your work on Varroa control is outstanding in this regard.

Some people cave under pressure and some thrive

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Actually one great thing MPI has done is stop people with bee related criminal convictions being able to export honey. This will be a hindrance to people like that dirtbag thief that is currently facing court, and MPI did not actually have to take such action. They have gone up a couple notches in my estimation for doing it.

  • Good Info 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 year later...
40 minutes ago, Gino de Graaf said:

Time to say No to twice yearly inspection of honey extraction plants?? How... 

some kind of petition? 

 

It is just not the twice yearly either, it is the size of the invoice given the amount of work involved in the audit/inspection.  The hourly rates must be $200 plus for this monopolised service.

  • Agree 1
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

this is the sort of thing that lobbying should be effective on. If only we had some sort of organisation that claims to act on behalf of the beekeeping industry and has their finger on the pulse - unfortunately, i suspect the levy fiasco has probably damaged political credibility for api-nz, maybe somebody else could step up.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Dennis Crowley said:

ahh tom have you been drinking, are those voices getting loud again, perhaps you should acquaint youreslf with how it came to be that we have two audits.

ignoring the insulting and disgusting tone suggesting drunkenness or mental health issues...

 

I don't know the history regarding two audits per year for rmp facilities. As you seem disinclined to provide the info here, i'll look into it.

Cheers.

I've got the following from an api-nz submission (https://apinz.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/ApiNZ-Submission-to-MPI-on-GREX-13-June-2017.pdf)that seems to support the RMP approach, but i don't see anything there about two audits. WIll keep looking i guess.

 

12.MPI proposes that processors of bee products for export under the Food Hygiene Regulations must move to a risk-based measure (either an RMP under the Animal Products Act 1999, or Food Control Plan or National Programme under the Food Act 2014). Do you agree or disagree with this proposal?I agree because:Agree. The purpose of traceability is to give confidence in the product.That is why New Zealand’s RMP operators, whoare professional in their operations, have verifiable record-keeping systems in place and are audited regularly.All operators are responsible for the integrity of traceability and that ultimately depends on the accuracy of all documentation.Industry shouldnot need to carry the burden of potentially non-compliant product stemming from premises operating under differing criteriathat may potentially damage our overseas reputation.All bee productscompliant for export must be processed and remain within an RMP system.

frequency of rmp audits appears to have been consulted on late in 2018: https://www.mpi.govt.nz/news-and-resources/consultations/proposed-animal-products-operational-code-verification-frequency/

guess that was a chance to influence rmp audit frequency?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The great thing about the the internet is that I can do business with the globe from my Kitchen stool  while on a coffee IV sip at any time of day.

This morning was a session with Europe. And as the coffee was pumping through the arteries speeding the emails back and forth over a gazillion kilometers and I waxed lyrical about why we produce some of the cleanest and purest honey on the planet, not to mention some of the most expensive , I had to quantify that .

And as much as  I  dislike paying twice yearly for honey house and export documentation and certification , it all of a sudden  gave me both pleasure and power to state catagorically to my new found overseas friends  that because  we have the most  over regulated and documented bee industry in the world .....  the price of my product is what it is.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, jamesc said:

The great thing about the the internet is that I can do business with the globe from my Kitchen stool  while on a coffee IV sip at any time of day.

This morning was a session with Europe. And as the coffee was pumping through the arteries speeding the emails back and forth over a gazillion kilometers and I waxed lyrical about why we produce some of the cleanest and purest honey on the planet, not to mention some of the most expensive , I had to quantify that .

And as much as  I  dislike paying twice yearly for honey house and export documentation and certification , it all of a sudden  gave me both pleasure and power to state catagorically to my new found overseas friends  that because  we have the most  over regulated and documented bee industry in the world .....  the price of my product is what it is.

I was excited there for a second. I thought the punch line was going to be they'd bought the lot ?

  • Agree 2
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

No matter who you talk to , whether it be in Timaru, Europe, the US or Asia, the story coming back is the same. There is a glut of honey and producers are dropping prices just to dump product. The market is in free fall.

I was at the field days this week ..... diggers are actually quite "Cheap"....    0% interest, no payments for six months ..... so .....   Reconfigure both the MAN and Stella with detachable decks on twist locks and we have multi tasking units .....Tractor units for pulling low loaders, dump trucks for moving dirt and flat decks for moving bees in the season.

We have the gear to dig ourselves out of a deep hole .What could possibly go wrong....

  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...