Mike Chapman NZKGI Chief Executive

One of Horticulture New Zealand’s jobs in Wellington is to keep an eye out for what new rules and laws the Government is producing and, when necessary, represent the views of our growers to advise or influence in that process.

Recently the Primary Production Select Committee considered an amendment to the Food Act. The committee is a group of Members of Parliament drawn from all political parties, who have an interest or speciality in our primary industries.

When law is being made for the primary industries, it is referred to this select committee for evaluation and, if necessary, correction before it is made law by Parliament. Anyone can make a submission to a select committee, either in writing, orally, or both. It’s our, and the public’s, chance to have a say and hopefully, if needed, get some changes made.

Product traceability

Our submission was about less regulation and not reinventing the wheel. The amendment to the Food Act is putting in place a system of product traceability so that if there is a food scare, the food at risk can be isolated, tracked back to the cause of the problem, and fixed. We totally support this. However, we advised the select committee that with our Good Agriculture Practice and Good Manufacturing Practice schemes, that are internationally accredited and have been running for 20 years, horticulture already has traceability.

What this amendment to the Food Act is doing is creating another state-run system, on top of the systems we already run that are recognised internationally and internationally accredited and accepted by all the major supermarkets our growers supply.

In short, we do not need another scheme; a state-run scheme that is not recognised internationally, is not internationally accredited, and is not recognised by the supermarkets our growers supply.

More costs

On top of that it will cost growers much more for the two schemes to operate. So our submission was: recognise our schemes for horticulture and don’t create extra regulation that will cost more and achieve nothing more. We are fortunate to have this opportunity to make a submission to the select committee and we will continue to advocate for recognition of our schemes.

The submitter directly before us, artisan cheesemaker Biddy Fraser-Davies, had certainly made some strong points about over-regulation and unnecessary costs, particularly for small producers, which landed as well as the cheese she brought for select committee members to taste.

As they complimented her cheese, she pointed out the difficulties of being a small producer in a system that was being designed for the large players, such as Fonterra, and how red tape was killing innovation.

Advocating for growers

Our example, and the cheese example, demonstrate the importance of the select committee process and the value Horticulture New Zealand adds by advocating for growers in Wellington. We plan to continue conversations with the Ministry for Primary Industries to ensure this legislation doesn’t disadvantage horticulture and meets the Government’s requirements.