Jump to content
ChrisM

our friends at MPI

Recommended Posts

Recently in another thread it was mentioned that honey in the domestic market is not regulated in the USA but here we have it in the NP1 category. It would be great if we had it in the NP0 category, but ahhh NP0 doesn't actually exist unfortunately.

 

Meanwhile I was shocked to come across the MPI antics around raw milk. First there is an article published here: https://www.nzherald.co.nz/the-country/news/article.cfm?c_id=16&objectid=12292244&fbclid=IwAR28RuU7rK4K45YFLH0IMoWQB-MSeFXVhovVkAJSQwHcyfLdPlp8jam22MY

 

and here is a commentary to that: https://www.rivervalley.co.nz/what-a-load-of-#######s-food-police-and-raw-milk/?fbclid=IwAR2foTqQtnhz39Pyv7GH6bIKTnWYAOTUczCKups1Y7DXFjDqmC-ivMeAFQU

 

We also have had comment on the forum in the past from beekeepers suggesting that MPI are so heavy handed that if you do the right thing and declare stuff to them that they are so idiotic they then end up destroying your whole business unnecessarily. I think some myrtle rust nurseries might have a view on it too. M. Bovis is another example. Then there is fisheries, cameras and high grading. We don't have any sentinel / bait hives around ports, but we do have a system where we can detect if something has already escaped into the rest of the country. Is it possible that Fonterra and the fishing industry employ people to constantly chew on MPI so what we see is MPI being pushed into these kinds of actions? How do small scale beekeepers gather together to push back the other way? The farming lobby is a BIG one, yet they got totally steam rollered by MPI's response to M. Bovis. What chance do we have? Apparently these  people can do what they like and the only shot at controlling them is to appeal to the Minister himself. This did manage to get produce an apology for the M. Bovis (huge victory?).

 

Ultimately these people control us. If I could ask only one question: is our MPI out of touch with reality and out of control? Or is there a huge amount of fantastic work they do and mistakes might be only 1% of their work; blown out of all proportion in the media?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ChrisM

  MPI is probably under resourced considering its enormous  job .

They probably outsource lots of stuff to private contactors like a lot of the public service does these days .

Its crazy this antagonism to the public service .

The public is us . There is no evidence the private sector is any more efficient.

There is good and bad in both .

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, kaihoka said:

@ChrisM

  MPI is probably under resourced considering its enormous  job .

They probably outsource lots of stuff to private contactors like a lot of the public service does these days .

Its crazy this antagonism to the public service .

The public is us . There is no evidence the private sector is any more efficient.

There is good and bad in both .

 

You have not seen anything yet.Wait until the GIA comes into force and another bee disease incursion.Who do you think will foot the bill, beekeepers of course?

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, kaihoka said:

@ChrisM

  MPI is probably under resourced considering its enormous  job .

They probably outsource lots of stuff to private contactors like a lot of the public service does these days .

Its crazy this antagonism to the public service .

The public is us . There is no evidence the private sector is any more efficient.

There is good and bad in both .

 

yes, "we" are "they". Still isn't it odd that they don't just go and talk to the farmers? The costs of a year planning to raid farms as opposed to just sending one car with one person in it would be more sensible if you were short of money?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am amazed at how often we are supposed to send a submission to the powers that be on a whole host of upcoming matters these days . Since when did this become normalised 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, M4tt said:

I am amazed at how often we are supposed to send a submission to the powers that be on a whole host of upcoming matters these days . Since when did this become normalised 

I have a client who confided in me that every year he made an appointment with his local MP and the MP's office was happy to arrange it. Every year they sit down together for around an hour and during this time my client has a list of points that he raises with his MP. I've no idea what he talks about. The MP doesn't necessarily agree nor take the slightest bit of action, but my client says that the MP does him the courtesy of listening and they each take a degree of effort. It seems way better than protesting with a placard. I'm in a different electorate and as my MP is from a party I don't vote for and my list MP is a bit of a nut job I don't feel very comfortable talking to either of them. I have instead written to Damien O'Connor on points that concerned me and he did put his name to a reply that I got back. Given that the public is us and that not everything is explained to the public, I think it is important that we all write to the Minister when specific things are just not right. I've never written about the same thing twice, I just have my say once and that's it. I'm definitely waived off on every occasion but behind the scenes we don't know what is happening and ultimately these people are also keeping a tally of votes, more so than MPI staff members. Changes to the AFBNPMP have been made and maybe that was partly done in response to the sheer weight of numbers of complaints and bearing in mind natural justice. You may not agree with it, but 'we' made a change albeit over many many years. You can be quite sure that the big C, Fonterra and others are putting forwards their case, maybe some with full time spin doctors on salary.

 

So, I believe we all need to write a polite letter once a year with specific detailed cases and present a rational case for changing things that are not right; no use complaining about it here anyway :) 

 

My personal view is that the integration of fisheries into MAF and adding food safety was an experiment probably to save money (not to improve output) and instead it has created a nightmare for all concerned. I would prefer to see the various departments separated. I don't mind if Fisheries, Agriculture, Food Safety and Bio-security all have the same minister, but I think each one operating separately would have a clearer focus to just concentrate on one thing, possibly just cost sharing some admin resources where it makes sense. 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ChrisM said:

yes, "we" are "they". Still isn't it odd that they don't just go and talk to the farmers? The costs of a year planning to raid farms as opposed to just sending one car with one person in it would be more sensible if you were short of money?

 

Was that comment serious?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Alastair said:

 

Was that comment serious?

yes, I think that comment was made in the article seriously. Obviously I don't know anything other than what was written in those two publications, but so far as I can see the facts are not in dispute between Granny Herald and the milk guy. Maybe I should ask exactly which comment you are  referring to?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, ChrisM said:

Is it possible that Fonterra and the fishing industry employ people to constantly chew on MPI so what we see is MPI being pushed into these kinds of actions? How do small scale beekeepers gather together to push back the other way?

 

To put it simply, join an industry body. I don't know if SNI ( @Trevor Gillbanks ?) or NZ Beekeeping ( ???) discuss matters with MPI but @ApiNZ certainly do. There is a hobbiest representative to raise issues with, as well as commercial representatives.

 

5 hours ago, ChrisM said:

Ultimately these people control us. If I could ask only one question: is our MPI out of touch with reality and out of control? Or is there a huge amount of fantastic work they do and mistakes might be only 1% of their work; blown out of all proportion in the media?

 

I don't know what that percentage is Chris. However in my view (and I have relayed this to many at MPI) is that they are set up to get a kicking - from everyone. When they do good work, they don't really communicate it well - and thus when something happens (e.g. myrtle rust - years after MPI began preparations for its arrival) then they get a kicking.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, JohnF said:

NZ Beekeeping ( ???) discuss matters with MPI

they sure do and I'm sure the others do too. However I think we all have a duty to put as much into writing with the Minister as we spend time moaning behind his back in the forum. But even though I already do belong to an industry body it doesn't change what MPI do to these farmers. I actually buy raw milk from a vending machine in a farm locally. It makes delicious coffee, I would be inconsolable if they had been one of the ones closed down.

 

34 minutes ago, JohnF said:

they are set up to get a kicking

yes, I get that. I still think it would help everyone if the Ag, Fish, etc were separate departments. The original press releases about this claimed $18m a year savings with most of the savings being in admin; few if any front line staff were lost. What was lost was a lot of back room admin staff in Wellington; so their own releases said ~8 years ago. One thinks they must certainly have saved money on apiweb, but seriously if there was no change in the officers why not leave them alone to work in their respective areas. It would be interesting to know if that was a real saving or window dressing or political ideology from the government of the day. Press releases of the day were quite clear it was going to save money, with output/service unaltered. I kid you not, words such as "agile" were used. I'm doubtful if the public service employees we are talking about, came up with this idea on their own of one large ministry to cover all and any primary industry.... But that's what they got.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, JohnF said:

To put it simply, join an industry body. I don't know if SNI ( @Trevor Gillbanks ?)  discuss matters with MPI but @ApiNZ certainly do. There is a hobbyist representative to raise issues with, as well as commercial representatives.

 

Yes we do (SNI Group) @JohnF, However, getting any results on things that we don't like /approve of is very difficult.

On matters where we have shared interests, then we get great reactions from MPI and in fact have made some very good friends at MPI.

 

It is extremely difficult if we try and swim against the tide on subjects/topic that we don't approve of.  But that is life.  I would not want to see our group or any of the other groups to be able to dictate.  But it would be nice to be invited to the table rather than just get presented with final results.

 

  • Like 4
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...