Export requirements for live animals microchipping

Source: Ministry for Primary Industries

Closing Date:

Contact: Live animal export assurance team

Have your say

The Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) is consulting on a single improvement to live animal export regulations under the Animal Products Act. The proposed update to the regulations will make it mandatory for all live horses to be microchipped prior to export. The consultation runs from 8 April to 6 May 2019.

What’s being proposed?

MPI is proposing to replace the current Animal Products (Export Requirements – Cats and Dogs) Notice 2012 with the updated Animal Products (Export Requirements for Live Animals Microchipping) 2019. The major changes from the previous notice include:

  • incorporating live horses into the scope of animals requiring microchipping prior to the issuing of an official assurance (Export Certificate)
  • requiring the exporter to retain the microchip information and have it readily available to reference for verification and certification purposes.

Full details are in the consultation documents.

Consultation documents

Legal Notice: Export Requirements for Live Animal Microchipping [PDF, 441 KB]

Consultation Document: Proposed amendments relating to live animal export microchipping [PDF, 365 KB]

Making your submission

Email your feedback on the draft documents by 5pm on 6 May 2019 to food.assurance@mipi.govt.nz

While we prefer email, you can post your submission to:

Amendments – Export Requirements for Live Animals Microchipping
Food and Live Animal Assurance Team (Level 11 TSB Tower)
Ministry for Primary Industries
PO Box 2526
Wellington 6140
New Zealand.

Make sure you include the following information in your submission:

  • the title of the consultation document
  • your name and title
  • your organisation’s name (if you are submitting on behalf of an organisation, and whether your submission represents the whole organisation or a section of it)
  • your contact details (such as phone number, address, and email).

Submissions are public information

Note, that any submission you make becomes public information. People can ask for copies of submissions under the Official Information Act 1982 (OIA). The OIA says we have to make submissions available unless we have good reasons for withholding them.  That is explained in sections 6 and 9 of the OIA.

Tell us if you think there are grounds to withhold specific information in your submission. Reasons might include that it’s commercially sensitive or it’s personal information. However, any decision MPI makes to withhold information can be reviewed by the Ombudsman, who may tell us to release it.

MIL OSI

Consolidated and revised notice exempting food for export from domestic compositional requirements

Source: Ministry for Primary Industries

Closing Date:

Contact: Food and live animal assurance team

Have your say

The Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) wants your feedback on a proposed consolidation and update of these 4 notices:

  • Animal Products (Glycerol Esters of Fatty Acids in Milk and Cream Based Formulations – Food Standards Exemption) Notice 2007
  • Animal Products Notice: Dairy Products – Food Standards Exemption – 6 December 2017
  • Food Notice: Food Standards Exemption Fonterra Limited – 7 November 2018
  • Food Notice: Dairy Based Products – Food Standards Exemption No. 5 – 20 November 2018

The consultation runs from 5 April to 3 May 2019.

Consultation documents

Related documents

Codex Standard for Follow-up Formula (CODEX STAN 156-1987)

What’s being proposed?

The proposed consolidation aims to assist exporters to identify all compositional exemptions that are granted for specific food products and markets. 

The structure of the document has been altered to assist clarity and reflect the requirement, under the Food Act 2014, that exemptions granted by notice are specific to a particular food and market. 

It is proposed that:

  • a number of exemptions are removed as they are no longer required
  • The Codex Standard for Follow-up Formula (CODEX STAN 155-1987) is incorporated by reference into the Food Notice: Exemptions from Domestic Compositional Requirements.
  • Record-keeping requirements, currently in the Food Notice: Dairy Based Products – Food Standards Exemption, apply to all exemptions granted under the proposed Notice.

Making your submission

Email your feedback on the draft documents by 5pm on 3 May 2019 to food.assurance@mpi.govt.nz

While we prefer email, you can post your submission to:

Consultation – Exemptions for Exported Food

Food and Live Animal Assurance Team
Ministry for Primary Industries
PO Box 2526
Wellington 6140
New Zealand.

What to include

Make sure you tell us in your submission:

  • the title of the consultation document
  • your name and title
  • your organisation’s name (if you are submitting on behalf of an organisation, and whether your submission represents the whole organisation or a section of it)
  • your contact details (such as phone number, address, and email).

Submissions are public information

Note, that any submission you make becomes public information. People can ask for copies of submissions under the Official Information Act 1982 (OIA). The OIA says we have to make submissions available unless we have a good reason for withholding it.  That is explained in sections 6 and 9 of the OIA.

Tell us if you think there are grounds to withhold specific information in your submission. Reasons might include that it’s commercially sensitive or it’s personal information. However, any decision MPI makes to withhold information can be reviewed by the Ombudsman, who may tell us to release it.

MIL OSI

National plan for M. bovis programme focused on eradication and supporting farmers

Source: Ministry for Primary Industries

The 3 partners working to eradicate Mycoplasma bovis (M. bovis) have reaffirmed their commitment to achieving eradication and supporting farmers through the eradication process.

The Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI), DairyNZ and Beef + Lamb New Zealand released the 2019 M. bovis National Plan at a meeting with farmers in Hamilton today.

The plan sets out 3 clear goals:

  • to eradicate M. bovis from New Zealand
  • to reduce the impact of the disease and the eradication programme for everyone affected
  • to leave New Zealand’s biosecurity system stronger.

The 2019 National Plan [PDF, 5.5 MB]

M. bovis programme director Geoff Gwyn said that the national plan is an important step in making sure that eradication is successful, and that farmers are properly supported the whole way.

“The eradication effort is on track, but there is still a lot of hard work to get done. There will be more farms put under movement restriction, and more farms that need to be depopulated,” says Gwyn.

“Finding out that your farm might be, or is, affected must be incredibly hard news to receive, and we know that the process to get clear of M. bovis causes hardship for farmers and their families, and interruption to their business.

“We want to provide as much support and assistance as we can, as well as working to continually improve the processes that farmers have to get through to get clear of M. bovis

“No country has attempted to eradicate M. bovis before, so there is a lot we are learning and developing as we go. The farmer and public meetings we’re holding over the next month are an important way for us to hear from farmers about what is working and areas that can be improved.”

DairyNZ’s Chief Executive Dr Tim Mackle says M. bovis has created challenges for many farmers, both dairy and beef – not only those affected by the disease, but for all farmers that have increased their biosecurity measures on farm.

“The alternative – to let this disease spread throughout the dairy and beef stock – would have been a serious challenge to the way we farm, and the ongoing costs would have been significantly higher” says Dr Mackle.

“We believe maintaining a collaborative approach to eradication is the best option for all farmers. By sitting at the table, we can ensure that dairy farmers are getting value for money from the eradication programme, costs are scrutinised, performance is monitored, and that dairy farmer’s views are represented to government.”

Beef + Lamb New Zealand chief executive Sam McIvor, says: “Although we are fortunate that M. bovis has had a less direct impact on beef farmers, the risks to our friends and neighbours with dairy farms means M. bovis is a challenge that we can’t ignore.

“We will continue to sit at the table with government and DairyNZ to ensure this eradication programme has the greatest chance of success, and that farmers are represented every step of the way.”

As part of the programme’s commitment to continual improvement, it is updating how it reports the number of affected properties. From today, we will report the total number of Confirmed Properties, Active Properties, and Cleared Properties, as we believe this is the most accurate and transparent way we can report on the scale of the programme, and progress towards eradication.

Find out more about changes to reporting classifications

Note

The eradication of M. bovis is no longer a Biosecurity New Zealand response, but a national programme funded, resourced and governed by DairyNZ, Beef + Lamb New Zealand, and MPI.

Weekly situation report – latest data on eradication progress

MIL OSI

Stricter stink bug controls proposed for imported cargo

Source: Ministry for Primary Industries

Date:

Media contact: MPI media team

The Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) is seeking feedback on plans to introduce stricter import requirements for vehicles and sea containers.

The changes are intended to make it harder for brown marmorated stink bug to establish in New Zealand, says Dr Cath Duthie, Biosecurity New Zealand spokesperson.

“The invasive pest is continuing to spread throughout Europe and the United States. The proposed new measures will help stop bugs from hitching a ride to New Zealand.”

The proposed changes include extending the list of countries that have requirements to treat vehicles, machinery and equipment imports before they arrive in New Zealand. At present, 18 countries have pre-treatment requirements. The proposed new list will increase to 33 countries.

All imported cargo related to vehicles will need to be treated off-shore, including sea containers. In the past, only uncontainerised cargo has required treatment before arrival.

MPI also intends to refine some of the off-shore management requirements under the existing import standard for vehicles.

MPI has also worked with the Australian Department of Agriculture and Water Resources to get measures that are aligned, making it easier for traders and shippers to comply.

MPI increased its border checks of arriving vessels at the start of this year’s stink bug season. It also introduced tighter rules for importing vehicles for a number of countries.

So far this season (to the end of March), border officers have detected 123 live stink bugs.

The consultations run from 3 April to 3 June 2019.

Find out about the consultations and have your say

Revised Import Health Standard for Vehicles, Machinery and Equipment

Revised Import Health Standard for Sea Containers

MIL OSI

New agreement to protect citrus industry

Source: Ministry for Primary Industries

Date:

Media contact: MPI media team

Biosecurity New Zealand and Citrus New Zealand have reached an agreement on how to prepare for and respond to future biosecurity threats.

Both parties signed a Sector Operational Agreement for Readiness and Response today under the Government-Industry Agreement (GIA) partnership. They have committed to undertake a joint 3-year programme of work to better protect the citrus industry from biosecurity threats.

“The GIA partnership enables us to work alongside industry to better understand the risks, and how we might deal with them if they reach our shores,” says Roger Smith, head of Biosecurity New Zealand.

“The pressure on our biosecurity system is increasing and we have to be better prepared for outbreaks.”

Under the agreement, Biosecurity New Zealand and Citrus New Zealand will jointly agree and fund readiness activities to improve preparedness for incursions of pests and pathogens that are considered a major concern to the citrus industry.

Biosecurity New Zealand and Citrus New Zealand joined the GIA in 2014 and 2016 respectively.

“We are all responsible for protecting Aotearoa from pests and pathogens, and this agreement under the GIA aligns with the wider Ko Tātou This Is Us Biosecurity 2025 programme to improve New Zealand’s biosecurity system,” says Mr Smith.

Chair of Citrus New Zealand, Wayne Hall, says: “Citrus New Zealand values the GIA partnership with Biosecurity New Zealand.  This agreement gives our relatively small sector the opportunity to take action to minimise the risks from diseases that could devastate our citrus production in New Zealand.  It’s a big commitment for the industry, but shows how seriously Citrus NZ takes our biosecurity to protect our orchards and continue to provide domestic and export customers with great tasting fresh New Zealand citrus.”

The agreement will cover preparing for and responding to incursions of huanglongbing (HLB), Asian citrus psyllid and citrus canker. These pests and pathogens have been identified as high priority by Citrus New Zealand and Biosecurity New Zealand. More pests and pathogens may be added over time.

Citrus New Zealand is also a signatory to the Fruit Fly Operational Agreement alongside Biosecurity New Zealand and other potentially-affected industry sectors.

Biosecurity New Zealand is part of the Ministry for Primary Industries.

Citrus New Zealand represents 320 New Zealand citrus growers producing around 30,500 tonnes of lemons, mandarins, oranges, tangelos, grapefruit, limes and other hybrids annually.

MIL OSI

Man fined for impersonating fishery officer, extorting money from tourists

Source: Ministry for Primary Industries

Date:

Media contact: MPI media team

A Kaikōura man has been fined for pretending to be a Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) fishery officer and extorting money from tourists who he told had caught undersized fish.

Forty-two-year-old Daniel James pleaded guilty to a charge of falsely claiming to be a fishery officer and was fined $600 and ordered to pay $130 court costs when he appeared in the Kaikōura District Court last week.

The court was told that Mr James approached 3 French tourists who had been freediving in South Bay at the end of November last year and told them he was a fishery officer and was there to inspect their catch.

He advised the tourists, after measuring the fish with his hands, that 2 of the fish were undersized and that the third was not fit to eat.

Mr James also told the trio that, by law, he should take all their equipment from them including their car and that he should send them to court.

He added that they would need to pay a $1,600 fine for the first fish and a $700 fine for the second, then told them that instead of going to court, they could give him a $200 cash donation.

The tourists asked Mr James for a business card but were told by Mr James he was on his day off and that his cards were in the office. He then advised that the tourists needed to pay up immediately or he would make everything official, take their passports and set a court date for them to appear at.

One of the tourists then drove to an ATM, withdrew $200 and gave the money to Mr James in the belief that it was a payment of a fine.

MPI spokesman Howard Reid says the incident is very disappointing and Mr James’ actions were completely unacceptable.

“His actions in falsely representing himself as a fishery officer are viewed as serious and something that could undermine the public’s trust in the law.  It was made even worse by doing so for financial gain.

“We are very grateful to the Kaikōura locals who looked after the tourists and encouraged them to report this incident to MPI and the Police.

“Our fishery officers do a very important job. They’re out and about ensuring everyone knows the fishing rules in their area and understanding why they exist. The people who Mr James lied to and extorted money from were innocent parties and did not deserve to go through the ordeal that they did.”

The courts ruled that James pay the $200 reparation to the French tourists.

MIL OSI

Revised Import Health Standard for Vehicles, Machinery and Equipment

Source: Ministry for Primary Industries

Closing Date:

Contact: Facilities and pathways group

Have your say

MPI has reviewed the Import Health Standard for Vehicles, Machinery and Equipment (the IHS) and wants your feedback on the proposed changes. The IHS was last updated in August 2018.

This consultation runs from 3 April to 3 June 2019.

What’s proposed?

MPI is proposing changes aimed at improving management of brown marmorated stink bugs with imports of vehicles, machinery and equipment. The proposals include:

  • increasing the list of actionable brown marmorated stink bug countries (Schedule 3 countries)
  • mandating before-arrival treatment of vehicles, machinery and equipment that are imported by sea container to align with the current requirements for vehicles and machinery imported as break-bulk
  • aligning with the Department of Agriculture and Water Resources in Australia around brown marmorated stink bug management where possible.
  • refining current requirements relating to treatment and system management of vehicles, machinery and equipment from countries listed in Schedule 3 of the IHS.

Some requirement changes designed to address other aspects of biosecurity risk associated with the importation of vehicles, machinery and equipment, but not directly related to brown marmorated stink bug management, have also been proposed.

We’ve also changed the layout of the IHS.

Details of the proposed changes are in the consultation documents.

Consultation documents

The draft IHS [PDF, 870 KB]
Draft Risk management proposal [PDF, 803 KB]

Related documents

Making your submission

Email your feedback on the draft by 5pm on 3 June 2019 to standards@mpi.govt.nz

Make sure you include in your submission:

  • the title of the consultation document in the subject line of your email
  • your name and title, if applicable
  • your organisation’s name (if you’re submitting on behalf of an organisation)
  • your contact details (for example, phone number, address and email).

While we prefer email, you can post your submission to:

Facilities and Pathways Group       
Plants and Pathways Directorate
Ministry for Primary Industries
PO Box 2526 Wellington 6140
New Zealand.

All submissions received by the closing date will be considered before the amended IHS is issued. MPI may hold late submissions on file for consideration when the issued IHS is next revised or reviewed.

Steps to finalising the new IHS

After consultation on a draft import health standard, MPI publishes a provisional IHS.

If you made a submission during the consultation, you have 10 working days to notify the Director-General of MPI that you intend to request an independent review. Reviews are limited to whether or not specific scientific evidence was given sufficient consideration.

If no review is requested within 10 working days, then the IHS is confirmed and issued.

More details about reviews are in the Biosecurity Act 1993.

Section 24 of the Biosecurity Act 1993 – NZ Legislation

Submissions are public information

Note that any submission you make becomes public information. People can ask for copies of submissions under the Official Information Act 1982 (OIA). The OIA says we have to make submissions available unless we have a good reason for withholding it.  That is explained in sections 6 and 9 of the OIA.

Tell us if you think there are grounds to withhold specific information in your submission. Reasons might include that it’s commercially sensitive or it’s personal information. However, any decision MPI makes to withhold information can be reviewed by the Ombudsman, who may tell us to release it.

Legal background

MPI must consult with interested parties in accordance with section 23 of the Biosecurity Act 1993 (the Act) and MPI’s consultation policy before issuing or amending (other than of minor or urgent nature) import health standards under sections 24A and 24B of the Act.

An IHS specifies import requirements that must be met either in the country of origin or of export, or during transit before biosecurity clearance can be given for the goods to enter New Zealand. MPI must ensure that these requirements are technically justified and provide an appropriate level of biosecurity protection.

MIL OSI

Revised Import Health Standard for Sea Containers

Source: Ministry for Primary Industries

Closing Date:

Contact: Facilities and pathways group

Have your say

MPI has reviewed the Import Health Standard for Sea Containers (the IHS) and wants your feedback on proposed changes. The IHS was last updated in October 2018 when some minor changes were made to remove ambiguities and fix some small errors.

This consultation runs from 3 April to 3 June 2019.

What’s proposed?

MPI is proposing changes to the IHS to better manage importation of sea containers from Italy. These changes are covered in Section 2.3 (2) of the IHS. 

MPI intends to require that all sea containers and cargo from Italy are treated before arrival in New Zealand. This requirement is for the management of brown marmorated stink bugs.

  • The sea containers and cargo must be treated in accordance with MPI Standard – Approved Biosecurity Treatments by an MPI-approved treatment operator.
  • The only exception to treatment will be for sea containers with cargo that is sensitive to treatment.
  • Inspection will be available to an importer where MPI has been advised about the sensitive cargo well in advance of arrival, and where an MPI chief technical officer has agreed that inspection under controlled conditions may be conducted instead of treatment.
  • Any containerised cargo from Italy that is not considered to be sensitive to treatment and that arrives at the New Zealand border untreated, will be refused permission to be unloaded from the arriving vessel. The cargo will be re-shipped back to Italy or shipped elsewhere.

Consultation documents

The draft IHS [PDF, 558 KB]
Draft Risk management proposal [PDF, 347 KB]

Related document

Making your submission

Email your feedback on the draft by 5pm on 3 June 2019 to standards@mpi.govt.nz

Make sure you include in your submission:

  • the title of the consultation document in the subject line of your email
  • your name and title, if applicable
  • your organisation’s name (if you’re submitting on behalf of an organisation)
  • your contact details (for example, phone number, address and email).

While we prefer email, you can post your submission to:

Facilities and Pathways Group       
Plants and Pathways Directorate
Ministry for Primary Industries
PO Box 2526 Wellington 6140
New Zealand.

All submissions received by the closing date will be considered before the amended IHS is issued. MPI may hold late submissions on file for consideration when the issued IHS is next revised or reviewed.

Steps to finalising the new IHS

After consultation on a draft import health standard, MPI publishes a provisional IHS.

If you made a submission during the consultation, you have 10 working days to notify the Director-General of MPI that you intend to request an independent review. Reviews are limited to whether or not specific scientific evidence was given sufficient consideration.

If no review is requested within 10 working days, then the IHS is confirmed and issued.

More details about reviews are in the Biosecurity Act 1993.

Section 24 of the Biosecurity Act 1993 – NZ Legislation

Submissions are public information

Note that any submission you make becomes public information. People can ask for copies of submissions under the Official Information Act 1982 (OIA). The OIA says we have to make submissions available unless we have a good reason for withholding it.  That is explained in sections 6 and 9 of the OIA.

Tell us if you think there are grounds to withhold specific information in your submission. Reasons might include that it’s commercially sensitive or it’s personal information. However, any decision MPI makes to withhold information can be reviewed by the Ombudsman, who may tell us to release it.

Legal background

MPI must consult with interested parties in accordance with section 23 of the Biosecurity Act 1993 (the Act) and MPI’s consultation policy before issuing or amending (other than of minor or urgent nature) import health standards under sections 24A and 24B of the Act.

An IHS specifies import requirements that must be met either in the country of origin or of export, or during transit before biosecurity clearance can be given for the goods to enter New Zealand. MPI must ensure that these requirements are technically justified and provide an appropriate level of biosecurity protection.

MIL OSI

Another pea weevil free year needed in the Wairarapa

Source: Ministry for Primary Industries

Date:

Media contact: MPI media team

The current Biosecurity New Zealand ban on pea growing in Wairarapa is knocking down the pea weevil population, but another pea weevil free year is needed to be confident of eradication.

The pest was first discovered in the Wairarapa in 2016 and has been subject to an eradication programme since then.

“Our trapping programme did not find any pea weevils in the 2018 surveillance, which is a promising result after the discovery of just 15 the previous season, says Biosecurity New Zealand spokesperson Dr Cath Duthie.

“It’s encouraging progress when you consider the more than 1700 that were detected in the 2016 growing season. We always said the ban would be for a minimum of two years. What we need is two consecutive years of no pea weevils being found before we can confidently say we have eradicated this significant pest.”

Pea weevils lay their eggs in developing peas and the growing larvae feed on the young peas, reducing the yield of pea crops, germination of pea seeds, and potentially threatening our valuable fresh and seed pea exports.

Providing no more weevils are trapped, Biosecurity New Zealand would look at lifting the ban for the 2020/21 growing season. The current ban will continue until 2019/20 growing season is complete.

“We understand the restrictions have had an impact on the pea growing industry and wider Wairarapa community and Biosecurity New Zealand would like to recognise their efforts and support,” says Dr Duthie.

“Growers have shown a great deal of flexibility by finding alternate crops to plant while we’ve been working to get rid of this pest and that support has been critical in our success so far.”

MIL OSI

Consultation on Organic Export Requirement: Organic Production Rules

Source: Ministry for Primary Industries

Closing Date:

Contact: Plants, wine, and organics assurance

Have your say

MPI wants your feedback on the proposed requirements for organic production under the MPI Official Organic Assurance Programme (OOAP), for exporting. We are interested to know if:

  • the requirements are easy to follow and understand
  • there is anything that needs more detail, or is missing.

Consultation documents

Related documents

What’s being proposed?

The Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) is reviewing the requirements for organic operators under the Official Organic Assurance Programme (OOAP). MPI is replacing the current standards with a single document called Organic Export Requirement: Operator Requirements. The major changes from the previous standards include:

  • major review of the language used, to make clear the difference between requirements (something that must or must not be done) and guidance (advice, interpretative assistance)
  • major restructure of the way information is presented, making it clearer what must be included in an Organic Management Plan, and what records must be kept for each type of operation
  • simplifying or removing the requirements for new input assessment rules, labelling, and imported products and ingredients (these requirements will be included in other documents)
  • introducing technical rules for aquaculture (bivalve species), algae, and non-wine alcoholic beverages.

This current draft will replace:

  • the 2005 version of the administrative rules for operators
  • the 2011 version of the technical rules of production
  • the 2014 technical rules for organic wine.

This consultation should be read together with the February 2018 consultation on Organic Export Requirement: Recognised Agencies and Persons.

Note: This consultation on new OOAP requirements is independent from work on a new regulatory regime for organics. In December 2018, Government announced that they will progress a national organic standard and associated compliance regime. The new regime will apply to imports, products produced and sold domestically, and exports. These new requirements will be subject to separate consultation. Updates on this work are available here:

Making your submission

Email your feedback on the consultation document by 5pm on 10 May 2019 to organics@mpi.govt.nz

Make sure you include in your submission:

  • the title of the consultation document
  • the document section numbers for any specific comments or queries you make
  • your name and title
  • your organisation’s name (if you submitting on behalf of an organisation, and whether your submission represents the whole organisation or a section of it)
  • your contact details (such as phone number, address and email).

While we prefer email, you can post written submissions to:

OOAP: Organic Production Rules Consultation
Plant, Wine and Organic Assurance
Assurance Directorate
Ministry for Primary Industries
PO Box 2526
Wellington 6140
New Zealand.

Submissions are public information

Any submission you make becomes public information. Anyone can ask for copies of all submissions under the Official Information Act 1982 (OIA). The OIA says we must make the information available unless we have a good reason for withholding it. You can find those grounds in sections 6 and 9 of the OIA. Tell us if you think there are grounds to withhold specific information in your submission. Reasons might include, it’s commercially sensitive or it’s personal information. However, any decision MPI makes to withhold information can be reviewed by the Ombudsman, who may require the information to be released.

MIL OSI