Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I cant remember who the speaker was at the conference inRotorua, but the answer to a similar question was that countries we are exporting to are asking more and more for evidence of the "whole" supply chain to given in the exporting documentation. A similar system is in place in the sawmilling industry. MPI oversee all exporting industry so it is simply them asking for the information to then be be able to present to the end customer. If you dont supply the information you dont get to supply your honey to the oversees market. Simple.

@dansar I agree with the first part of your post regarding markets asking for more detailed information - this is increasingly true for everything we export.

 

I don't agree with the second part being "simple". When I submit my honey to the extractor I already full out a harvest declaration - stating who I am, what I've submitted, how much, where it is from and that I have abided by (admittedly a few) important regulations. The only thing new I can see in the new form is a declaration on whether I've been involved in any fraud or dishonesty related to beekeeping. Setting aside the fact that pratts involved in fraud are inherently unlikely to declare that fact, for this one further small piece of information I have to pay another $180 a year.

 

Surely this is a joke - I'm an APINZ member - where are they in this discussion, acting in the best interests of their beekeeper members?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 156
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

It might be simple but it's just another beaurocratic foot trip that people have to pay to do business.The information I am giving MPI is hardly of interest to the end buyer.

But let's all just roll over and let it happen without a whisper because that's what we always do here in good old NZ

 

I understand why the requirement and have no argument with it, but I certainly agree the cost of simply logging a bit of data is way over the top.

 

Are these countries also asking that everyone pay an exorbitant fee to a bunch of fat cats who do nothing other than shuffle papers. If the true associated costs were what you paid, no one would mind but all government departments seem to find an opportunity to get there hooks in and then let you have it with both barrels. The fact that there is a lack of transparency when ever it comes to the fees we pay in every aspect of our lives means we can be merrily bled to death and we should always just believe that it is just the way it has to be. There does seem to be this mentality in this country that because kiwis quietly take what ever is dished out [ no matter how unfair ]

that it is now open slather.

 

Just another thought before I log off, maybe the MPI has got the word exporting mixed up with the word extortion. By for now and thanks for letting me vent.

This isnt the end of it either, Beekeeping in New Zealand and in particular at a commercial level is being brought in to the 21st century kicking and screaming. I am not condoning the costs but is is a reality of the export industry and it doesnt matter where you are in the system, there is always someone sucking on the hind tit.:(

Link to post
Share on other sites
Question: did anyone know this was coming? Is the lead time a little short?

I talked to 4 different people yesterday at MPI. They flat refused to answer any questions over the phone, they would get back to me only via e mail. When pressed one of them confessed, this had been dropped on them too with no warning.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Surely this is a joke - I'm an ApiNZ member - where are they in this discussion, acting in the best interests of their beekeeper members?

I imagine they heard about it yesterday too.......give them chance........have you rung them to ask ???

Link to post
Share on other sites

I keep coming back to this posted by @Pinnacle

 

When I submit my honey to the extractor I already full out a harvest declaration - stating who I am, what I've submitted, how much, where it is from and that I have abided by (admittedly a few) important regulations. The only thing new I can see in the new form is a declaration on whether I've been involved in any fraud or dishonesty related to beekeeping. Setting aside the fact that pratts involved in fraud are inherently unlikely to declare that fact, for this one further small piece of information I have to pay another $180 a year.

 

What does this tell us?

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the world we live in now. Meaningless fees lumped on us pretending to add value somewhere, but are in fact revenue gathering. It's a symptom of the increase in the value of a primary product, and others want a cut as well, for doing squat. I'm sort of used to it in my business, but not really, at the same time. There is continuous invention of this type of thing. Sadly, we can squeal, but there is not much we can do to stop the onslaught

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thing is Trevor MPI haven't said why, surely they should say that because of blah blah blah we have to blah blah blah.

 

$175 is very steep and the fact they haven't limited it to $175 but could be more depending on how long it takes to process the registration is a worry.

I hope our registration isn't processed over their lunch break it could get very expensive.

 

Imagine the fees we will pay if MPI and ApiNZ get cosy and sign a GIA

:(

Link to post
Share on other sites
Thing is Trevor MPI haven't said why, surely they should say that because of blah blah blah we have to blah blah blah.

 

$175 is very steep and the fact they haven't limited it to $175 but could be more depending on how long it takes to process the registration is a worry.

I hope our registration isn't processed over their lunch break it could get very expensive.

 

Imagine the fees we will pay if MPI and ApiNZ get cosy and sign a GIA

:(

 

I didn't say I approved Frazz. Yes, a very poor notification and as usual with MPI the cost is Way over the top.

Yes, I imagine when the GIA is signed then there will be a massive rise in all sorts of fees which should successfully drive many beekeeper to illegal practices (not registering etc).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Coming from a fruit growing background with a heavy export focus it has been mind bending how little paper trail beekeeping has had compared to kiwifruit or Apple growing. While I always dislike extra costs and unnecessary regulation I can fully understand why/how extra regulation is needed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Coming from a fruit growing background with a heavy export focus it has been mind bending how little paper trail beekeeping has had compared to kiwifruit or Apple growing. While I always dislike extra costs and unnecessary regulation I can fully understand why/how extra regulation is needed.

i quite agree.

 

going by events over the last few years with stolen honey/hives being sneaked into the export system under other peoples RMP's, and contamination issues (eg adding DHA). things will be getting tighter with more detailed paper trail.

this will help stop the nz honey price bubble from popping.

 

keep in mind who we are selling our products to. poor ######s don't buy kiwi honey, only the wealthy do and they like to know where it comes from and expect assurances of its quality.

Link to post
Share on other sites
And how is this registration going to help with anything?

It's all very well saying we need more regulation but surely the rules that are brought in need to be fit for purpose?

It's not for our benefit. Its so that Mr Wong in Beijing knows exactly (if he can be bothered looking) who supplied the honey he's passing on to his supermarkets.

Link to post
Share on other sites
It's not for our benefit. Its so that Mr Wong in Beijing knows exactly (if he can be bothered looking) who supplied the honey he's passing on to his supermarkets.

and if there is an issue with a product.

a good example if the fruit industry. i'm told of one instance where spray residue was found in japan and it was traced right back to the 10 acre block the fruit came from.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Kiwifruiter and @tristan please reconsider your approval of more regulation here. Just because other industry have tried to 'close ranks' and demand government interference does not make it right, it just makes their industry less profitable and less productive with more overheads. I challenge you to present examples of government interference that do not involve increased costs for the taxpayer.

 

I would like to see all beekeepers submit emails of protest to the relevant government people over this issue and demand an immediate stand down by MPI.

 

History shows that the cost of regulation is borne by the people. It is very clear in this case with this MPI money grab.

 

Let me be clear. MPI is demanding $178 PER YEAR for the 'privilege' of being able to supply our product to the RMP process for export.

 

The only information they are collecting here is your address, and declaration of criminal activity.

 

This is a duplication of an existing system, as all sites are required to be registered, and beekeepers are required to be registered also. If MPI do not already have access to registration info at Asurequality - then all they need to do is include a waiver clause in the Harvest Declaration form to get permission for access as part of a beekeeper supplying honey to the RMP system.

 

@tristan - as long as there is no fraud in the paperwork all honey can be traced to a site and potentially samples already. This new notice to register beekeepers is just a money grab.

 

If someone wants to cheat or game the system then there is always a way. It's up to the buyer to choose a reliable supplier. If people choose to cheat others then word spreads and a bad reputation will cost the opportunity of building a more profitable venture.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Let me be clear. MPI is demanding $178 PER YEAR for the 'privilege' of being able to supply our product to the RMP process for export.

its $178. out of the $0.5+mil turnover, if your worried about $178 your doing something very wrong.

the money side is not really the issue here. all it is people don't like fees or red tape.

 

we have gone from a poor industry to one thats starting to be worth a bit.

the rules and paperwork are always going to increase because we have had next to nothing before hand. we still have very little red tape.

once if we start getting more than other industries, then feel free to start complaining.

 

 

It's up to the buyer to choose a reliable supplier.

that never happens. buyers take the cheapest easiest they can, then blame everyone else for the failings.

just look at the velvet leaf and unapproved insecticide imports thats been going on. buyers simply don't give a crap.

there no shortage of fly by night exporters trying to make money out of the honey industry at the moment.

 

 

someone wants to cheat or game the system then there is always a way.

but we don't have to make it easy for them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
its $178. out of the $0.5+mil

 

Really? I will PM you my bank account details, feel free to make a deposit any time you like.

 

Its $178 for what!

if we all roll over and don't make a noise where does it end?

 

I've already sent an email to MPI asking why the registration is being implemented and who decided it would be so.

Link to post
Share on other sites
It's not for our benefit. Its so that Mr Wong in Beijing knows exactly (if he can be bothered looking) who supplied the honey he's passing on to his supermarkets.

Mr Wong is already covered. Asure Quality already know the number of hives in each apiary, they know the exact location of every apiary. On my harvest dec every box from every apiary is listed and every box is listed on each and every batch. If I don't dot every i and cross every t then the auditor throws back in my face. If there is problem at Mr Wongs supermarket the problem can already be traced back.

If it isn't broke don't fix it.

This new regulation does nothing for traceability.

Link to post
Share on other sites

point 1:

It's not the amount of money involved @tristan, it's value for money - or in this case the clear over the top bull charge. Also why do you even post this to support a duplicated system? Do you work for MPI?

 

point 2 - your claim that people always choose cheapest and easiest:

Easy to disprove your statement - please prove your thesis or retract.

 

point 2b:

If you are aware of illegal activity then report it. Since you say there is so much happening then it should be easy to show some examples and deliver proof to relevant authorities.

 

point 3:

again - no examples of how this makes cheating harder. Can you show how this notice will make cheating harder? Keep in mind that beekeepers are already registered, so the systems already exist to track hive products.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was under the understanding that the site locations and regos is confidential to the management agency? If so the gov dont have formal access to it.

 

 

Given the fact that NZ honey is worth close on 3 times what the overseas average is overseas, we need to accept a certain amount of hoop jumping to maintain that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Wong is already covered. Asure Quality already know the number of hives in each apiary, they know the exact location of every apiary.

Is that including extra 30% they found in taranaki? Maybe that is where the effort should be directed

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...