• Legislation
• Media Centre
• Publications
• What's New

THE YEAR IN REVIEW:

This section illustrates how our work and achievements over the past year have contributed towards our outcomes

MAF's outcome framework

 

Overview of Achievements

OUTCOME 1: New Zealand's economic growth and prosperity are enhanced through a high-performing and innovative sector

This outcome recognises that growth in primary sector output requires product, process, market and institutional innovation. The sector-specific business environments which influence these factors are critical in determining the future economic performance, productivity and market share of the primary sector.

Intermediate Outcome 1.1: Policies and interventions to foster innovation and growth in the sector

The year in review

Our Sustainable Farming Fund received a positive evaluation report this year, as it sought to improve the capability of the agriculture and forestry industries to use new innovation and “best practice” for their sustainable development. A successful budget round also meant that we can provide more research and development support in a number of key areas (e.g. Pastoral 21).

“From here we will hopefully see the sectors step up so they can make greater returns from services and embedded technologies.”
Paul Reynolds, Assistant Director-General (Policy)

Performance measures:

• MAF and NZFSA completed input into the Food and Beverage Sector Engagement, working with the Ministry of Economic Development (MED) to respond to the recommendations and contributing to the final government response.
• Our Sustainable Farming Fund successfully contracted and monitored the delivery of 64 contracts in the 2006/07 year.
• We successfully negotiated 23 project agreements under the Forest Industry Development Agenda (FIDA) Market Development Initiative and the fund is fully subscribed.
• We continued work on understanding the drivers of total factor productivity (TFP) in the agriculture and forestry industries. To date we have a TFP series for agriculture, forestry and downstream sectors and also analysis of the contribution of technological change and efficiency gain at the farm-level to TFP.
• Due to competing priorities, we revised the completion date our study of forests and forestry, laying a basis for sustainable economic growth in the sector, to the first half of the 2007/08 year.

The year ahead

The key challenges ahead will be developing the policy parameters for climate change and water allocation - we will focus on completing the required work on time. On top of this, the international market for sheep and beef remains a significant uncertainty.

Intermediate Outcome 1.2: Effective and efficient regulatory regimes for the sector

The year in review

At a MAF-wide level, we agreed on a framework to ensure consistency in the Ministry's interventions across the whole organisation (to be implemented from 2007/08). We also worked on dairy quota deregulation and continued work on the Commodity Levies Act. NZFSA completed reviews of both domestic and imported food and began drafting new legislation. The major biosecurity development was the Biosecurity Compliance Framework, with a goal of individuals taking responsibility for their own biosecurity risks and not simply relying on end point inspection.

Maintaining High Standards
New Zealand has a reputation for high quality, safe products and production systems. MAF and NZFSA have helped maintain this advantage through our statutory powers under the range of Acts below. We work alongside the public to pursue the purposes of these Acts, and prosecution is always our last resort.
LEGISLATION	ACTION TAKEN
Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Act	1 completed prosecution
Regarding agricultural compounds
Animal Products Act	2 completed prosecutions (8 pending)
Regarding the processing of animal material into products for use, trade, and export
Animal Welfare Act	9 completed prosecutions including 1 under appeal (plus 20 pending)
Regarding the welfare of animals and prevention of their ill-treatment
Biosecurity Act	47 completed prosecutions (plus 8 pending) 4,876 infringement notices
Regarding the exclusion, eradication, and effective management of pests and unwanted organisms
Food Act	1 completed prosecution (plus 4 pending)
Regarding the sale of food
Forests Act	1 completed prosecution (plus 3 pending)
Regarding both indigenous and exotic forestry
Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act	1 completed prosecution
Regarding the management of hazardous substances and new organisms

“This change in approach is necessary because it is very difficult to find two ants in a 40-foot container.”
Barry O'Neil, Assistant Director-General (Biosecurity)

Performance measures:

• We reviewed existing legislation, policies and relevant Acts within specific components of the sector as ongoing work. We also issued Codes of Welfare for companion cats and deer.
• We ensured imported food complied with New Zealand imported food standards. Instances of non-compliance to standards were responded to appropriately and we have broadened the basis of standards we confirm foods meet.
• We completed a cost recovery review for export services and amended the necessary regulations. This included harmonising cost recovery for plant and forestry exports, and changing to a more efficient approach for live animal and germplasm exports.

The year ahead

We will review our Import Health Standard development process in the coming year. We will also look at using co-regulation as way to encourage voluntary compliance, while using a regulatory net to catch those who do not comply. We will continue to work on increasing our efficiency and minimising regulation where possible. Separate from MAF, NZFSA will begin a review of the Animal Products Act regulatory regime.

Intermediate Outcome 1.3: Enhanced prosperity for Māori engaged with, or participating in, the sector

The year in review

Our Crown Forestry group has continued to surrender leased forestry land and return it to direct Māori management. These activities contribute to the economic prosperity of the Māori lessor groups. We began the GIS Māori Land Assessment project, aiming to provide better information about the location and characteristics of Māori land, particularly potential land use capability.

“We do not yet fully understand the potential of Maori land and land-based enterprises. More dialogue is required with Maori before the dimensions of this outcome are fully understood.”
George Ria, Director, Maori Strategy Unit

Managing our Crown Forests

We managed 36,108 hectares of production forests on behalf of the Crown over the year. These 25 forests are scattered across the North Island and are either residual Crown-owned forests or leases on Māori land. We surrendered 2,665 hectares from four of these leases back into Māori management.

Performance measures:

• We managed forestry leases of Māori land to “best practice” commercial and forestry standards.
• We negotiated variations to the long-term leases of Māori land on terms mutually beneficial to Māori and the Crown.
• We assisted with the transfer of Crown forestry assets to Māori in Treaty of Waitangi settlements.

“It was satisfying to see 2,665 ha surrendered from the lease areas and returned to Maori management over the past year.” Charles Schell, General Manager, Crown Forestry

The year ahead

The main challenge facing Crown Forestry over the next year will be predicted volatility in the markets for our forest produce.

Another significant challenge is to fully understand the environment in which Māori landowners operate, and to have a robust knowledge base with quality data. Once completed, information from the GIS should allow us to assess the extent of Māori land currently under-utilised (compared to its potential) at a regional level.

Intermediate Outcome 1.4: Enhanced business environment for rural communities

The year in review

In conjunction with MED, we made progress on the rural broadband issue, although it is increasingly likely the solution will be technological change rather than policy development. We have been developing a “rural proofing” approach to policy which seeks to improve other agencies' thinking around issues which potentially impact on rural communities and interests.

“MAF uses a different approach to rural communities to that taken overseas. We look at rural businesses being able to support a vibrant rural community. Overseas the focus is on preserving the rural landscape or the rural way of life, with rural communities being seen as an end objective in themselves.” Paul Reynolds,
Assistant Director-General (Policy)

Performance measures:

• We identified infrastructure impediments to prosperous businesses in rural communities and will continue to work at minimising these impediments where practical.
• We provided advice and input on other government agencies' proposals with regard to equitable and workable access to essential services for rural communities.
• We continued to promote the important role of the agriculture, food and forestry sectors and communities, and awareness of the nature of rural production systems, to government agencies and the general public.

The year ahead

The main challenge will be to expand the understanding of the rural business environment and promote and raise awareness of the rural sector in rural communities.

OUTCOME 2: Safe and freer rules-based trade

This outcome covers international trade initiatives which enhance the sector's contribution to domestic economic growth and prosperity. It focuses on trade (imports and exports; opportunities and rules) and maintaining confidence in the country's domestic biosecurity and food regulatory systems. This includes work on global trade liberalisation and the need for New Zealand to take a strategic, principled and consistent approach to international trade rules in order to maintain international influence. This outcome also includes managing product safety risks associated with international trade.

Intermediate Outcome 2.1: Maintained and enhanced market access for agricultural, food and forestry products and reduced market distortions resulting from trade rules and market interventions

The year in review

Our key areas of focus were the World Trade Organisation's (WTO) Doha Round and the Free Trade Agreement (FTA) with China. While neither negotiation was concluded, the outlook is positive for the China FTA to be completed by end of 2007. We also worked on ensuring butter access to the EU was not lost following the European Court of Justice's decision on the Egenberger case. In addition NZFSA has secured equivalency deals for New Zealand organics with Japan and the United States of America (USA).

Performance measures:

• We provided support for cross-government approaches to improve trade liberalisation and market access, ensuring agriculture, food, forestry and related issues are addressed effectively and consistently.
• Through participation in international forums and in trade negotiations MAF and NZFSA advocated for safe and freer rules-based trade as well as international standards based on sound science in key international negotiations and interactions.
• MAF and NZFSA negotiated changes to importing country requirements to reflect New Zealand's risk-based standards.

“Often there is not enough recognition of the difficulty of just maintaining market access for New Zealand’s products.”
Paul Reynolds, Assistant Director-General (Policy)

The year ahead

Our biggest challenge will be capturing the maximum trade gains from newly negotiated FTAs. To be more effective we need to develop a more strategic approach and ensure we have adequate capability to take advantage of the market opportunities FTAs provide.

“Animal welfare is a long term strategic issue and we appreciate the assistance we have received from MAF on this issue.”
(Meat and Wool NZ)

Reaching Across the Globe Our country exports a huge range of agricultural, food and forestry products to the world. MAF and NZFSA continued to develop market access for New Zealand products. By working with the rest of government, we have improved trading conditions and resolved significant problems or new threats to trade with the European Union, United States, Japan, China, Indonesia, Philippines and Mexico. It takes a whole-of-government approach to maintain access to these markets and we work very closely with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade. NZFSA has done significant work on improving the confidence developing markets have in New Zealand - NZFSA's relationships abroad currently underpin over $15 billion worth of our export trade. However, with freer trade comes increased biosecurity risks. We developed Import Health Standards, which aim to reduce our risk from pests before they reach our borders, and we processed goods arriving from across the globe. New Zealand must treat exports and imports consistently and accept that as we open trade opportunities for our products, the pressure on our biosecurity from new arrivals will increase.

Intermediate Outcome 2.2: Credible and trusted animal and plant product assurance

The year in review

Our participation and leadership at meetings of international standard setting bodies and at the WTO Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) Committee maintained New Zealand's reputation as an international leader in this area. A negative audit report by the European Union's (EU) Food and Veterinary Office on exports of bovine semen and embryos to the EU prompted a review of our germplasm export system.

Performance measures:

• NZFSA developed and maintained a high level of performance in reviews by countries importing New Zealand food. With the exception of MAF's negative audit report from the EU's Food and Veterinary Office, New Zealand export assurances are generally accepted.
• MAF and NZFSA are recognised as international leaders in the application and development of international standards, strategies and WTO SPS principles.
• We negotiated changes in importing country requirements where their requests did not meet agreed international principles.

The year ahead

As well as embedding the changes to the assurance system (as a result of the EU audit report) we will seek to maintain and further expand our quality assurances. In the wake of NZFSA's separation from MAF we will work to ensure we do not duplicate assurance activities and will continue to seek minimal compliance and regulatory costs.

“We have a reputation for high levels of professionalism and ethics.”
Barry O'Neil, Assistant Director-General (Biosecurity)

“Animal welfare is a long term strategic issue and we appreciate the assistance we have received from MAF on this issue.”
(Meat and Wool NZ)

Intermediate Outcome 2.3: Balanced export and import regime covering the safety and suitability aspects of trade in animal and plant products

The year in review

We worked hard to progress new product access into New Zealand, despite domestic resistance where industries sought to protect the restricted domestic markets they currently enjoy.

Performance measures:

• We contributed to briefings compiled by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MFAT) and participated in the WTO SPS Committee which meets three times each year. Through this multilateral mechanism, New Zealand can monitor and influence trading partners' implementation of their obligations under international rules.
• We developed memoranda of understanding and other arrangements to support our key trading relationships.
• NZFSA developed and maintained strategic relationships with counterpart food safety agencies in other countries.
• We have been making procedural improvements to Import Health Standards and these are now well established.

The year ahead

It is important we work to ensure our import restrictions are evidence-based and perceived as reasonable both domestically and internationally. In the past we have used a biological risk assessment method to make decisions but we are now looking at the potential use of more inputs such as cost benefit analysis. We will also continue to make further improvements to Import Health Standards.

“If we want no arbitrary trade barriers imposed on New Zealand exports then we cannot impose barriers ourselves.”
Andrew McKenzie, Executive Director (NZFSA)

“We need to have all the various agencies working [together]. Recognising that MAF has to protect the border and the biosecurity of this country is absolutely critical.”
(Port of Tauranga)

SERVING THE ANIMAL WELFARE SYSTEM The welfare of our animals is important to you as New Zealanders and to our consumers overseas. We provide secretarial and scientific support to New Zealand's two animal welfare advisory committees to the Minister of Agriculture: THE NATIONAL ANIMAL WELFARE ADVISORY COMMITTEE (NAWAC) advises the Minister on general animal welfare issues and oversees the development of codes of welfare under the Animal Welfare Act 1999. During the year, NAWAC recommended codes of welfare for companion cats and deer, which the Minister issued. It hosted a stakeholder workshop discussing how to increase the use of pain relief in production animal management. NAWAC also updated its animal welfare research priorities, which were submitted to the Minister and circulated to research funding bodies, research providers, industry and other stakeholders. THE NATIONAL ANIMAL ETHICS ADVISORY COMMITTEE (NAEAC) advises the Minister on ethical and welfare issues arising from the use of live animals in research, testing and teaching (RTT). It also gives advice on the codes of ethical conduct governing live animal use in RTT and provides information to animal ethics committees, who administer the codes. This year, NAEAC presented its annual award for “best practice” in implementing the principles of the 'Three Rs' - replacement, reduction and refinement of the use of animals in RTT - and hosted a national workshop in November for members of animal ethics committees.

Intermediate Outcome 2.4: Protection of land-based and aquatic environments, primary production systems, trade, and human health and wellness from biosecurity pests

The year in review

At the end of the year there were 147 incursion responses underway. It is difficult to know how much effort and investment is enough to stop pests entering New Zealand, and how much to invest in prevention, as opposed to eradication of pests when they arrive.

Performance measures:

• We have been constantly reviewing import standards and border controls to ensure cost effective management of biosecurity risks.
• We delivered all but one emergency response pest programmes under budget.
• We have been working on the new standard pest and disease incursion response system, with implementation due in the first half of 2007/08. This will include all response functions delivered internally by our biosecurity group.
• To improve the sector's pest and disease capability, we began a project to develop agreements with industry on cost sharing and decision-making for emergency responses. Response preparedness work is still underway with draft agreements due for completion in 2008.
• We have continued to develop our pest and disease investigation and diagnostic capability.

The year ahead

The Border Sector Governance Group was set up by Chief Executives from the three core border agencies - the Customs Service, the Department of Labour and MAF - as well as the Ministry of Transport, to explore practical and pragmatic ways to improve New Zealand's border management.

A POCKETFUL OF PESTS Why does one apple in your pocket really matter when you enter New Zealand? Agricultural and forestry products make up almost a fifth of our GDP and just a few stowaway bugs in a piece of food or soil have the potential to cripple an industry. Biosecurity has always been an important part of MAF's job. It is absolutely critical for protecting the viability of our production systems as well as human health and our natural environment. Air passengers with undeclared risk items seized per total air passengers

“We have achieved this outcome in many ways but find it frustrating when a pest enters the country and the public only sees failure and not our success in keeping all the other pests out.”
Barry O'Neil, Assistant Director General (Biosecurity)

 

OUTCOME 3: Healthy New Zealanders

This outcome focuses on the contribution the primary production and domestic food industries make to New Zealanders' health and wellbeing. It includes both the contribution made by the food production, processing and retail industries, and MAF's wider role in managing the incursion of pests and diseases harmful to the public. It recognises the role biosecurity plays in human health and enjoyment of the environment through early detection of pests and diseases.

Intermediate Outcome 3.1: Safe and suitable food for New Zealanders

The year in review

The Government has approved policy for a new Food Act. We developed transition and related implementation proposals, subjecting them to extensive public, local government and industry consultation. We completed a major review of cost recovery across the legislation NZFSA administers, in particular under the Animal Products Act, and a robust cost recovery model is now in place. We also provided policy advice on a review of animal feeds regulation, the implementation and operation of the Wine Act, a successful review of the New Zealand BSE Measure, a review of the Dietary Supplements Regulations, and the Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Amendment Bill.

Performance measures:

• A risk-based approach to food management was incorporated into the Domestic Food Review and other New Zealand standards.
• NZFSA developed and strengthened concepts, internal systems and processes for managing emergencies and food recalls. The emergency response process is currently under review.
• We completed the Imported Foods Review which was accepted by Government and is now being implemented. NZFSA continues to review standards and systems for imports, especially for high risk goods and new and emerging risks.
• NZFSA developed performance measures for food regulatory programmes and continues to review legislation, hazard levels and trends in the food regulatory programme.
• NZFSA improved its communication of food safety information through seeking effective methods of communication and open and active consultation with stakeholders.

The year ahead

A major activity for NZFSA next year will be drafting and implementing legislation for domestic and imported food.

Intermediate Outcome 3.2: Reduced impacts on human health and wellness from biosecurity pests and pest management activities

The year in review

We have worked closely with the Ministry of Health (MoH) on both the southern salt-marsh mosquito eradication programme (which was transferred to MAF this year), and on Import Health Standards that affect humans.

FOCUSING ON FOOD Food safety is fundamental for New Zealand - for our health as consumers and for the country's export assurances. NZFSA has administered food safety legislation and provided product assurance since 2002 as a semi-autonomous body attached to MAF. In May 2007, the Government decided NZFSA should become its own government department from 1 July 2007. In this new arrangement, NZFSA will continue to protect consumers' health and enhance New Zealand's position as a trusted food supplier. As well as sharing some of our corporate services, MAF and NZFSA will continue to work together in our shared purpose of facilitating trade for New Zealand's products.

“New Zealand has 4.5 million sets of eyes and we need every one of them working with us to have a successful biosecurity system.”
Barry O'Neil, Assistant Director-General (Biosecurity)

Performance measures:

• We developed a communications strategy addressing stakeholder management, public awareness and the most effective use of communications media. We will implement the strategy from the beginning of 2007/08.
• In order to ensure pest management tools are safe and appropriate we worked with:

  • the Environmental Risk Management Authority (ERMA) and the Ministry for the Environment (MfE) on access to plant germplasm;

  • ERMA on the relationship between applications for new organisms, Import Risk Analyses and Import Health Standards;

  • MoH on development of Import Health Standards relating to human body parts; and

  • counterpart agencies in Australia, Canada and the USA to share scientific information and technology.

The year ahead

Our biggest challenge for the future will be pursuing market access benefits while at the same time managing an increased risk at the border from greater volumes and a wider range of imports. Another potential trend we must consider is the new biosecurity risks that climate change may bring.

“The implementation of the Animal Products Act has changed how sectors operate and moved from a 'command and control' type of regime to one where the individual sectors take responsibility for creating fit-for-purpose food.”
Andrew McKenzie, Executive Director (NZFSA)

BETTERING BIOSECURITY We manage New Zealand's biosecurity from start to finish - beyond the border, at the border and within the border. This year we looked at how we manage biosecurity and decided to integrate our two biosecurity arms - Biosecurity New Zealand (BNZ) and the MAF Quarantine Service (MAFQS) - into MAF Biosecurity New Zealand. This will ensure standard setting, resource and priority decisions are made using a whole-of-biosecurity system approach that builds on the vision of the 2003 Biosecurity Strategy for New Zealand. But structural integration is only one part of building MAF's biosecurity capacity. At the start of 2007, we did a lot of work under a Biosecurity Transformation Programme, aiming to build a more “fit-for-purpose” biosecurity system. We have also been reviewing our border strategy and regulatory design, considering our IT requirements and implementing our Quarantine Capability Project. We have strived to keep New Zealand's biosecurity system as one of the world's best!

 

OUTCOME 4: Management of natural resources to meet the sustainable economic, environmental and cultural values, aspirations and obligations of New Zealanders

This outcome covers the long term environmental, and therefore economic, sustainability of the primary production sector and focuses on enhancing the contribution the sector can make to society's wellbeing. It includes the sustainability of soil, water, biological resources and biosecurity and addresses any negative impacts of sector activity on the environment. It recognises primary sector development and trade should not be at the expense of natural resources, and must be aligned with society's expectations, changing market requirements and international obligations.

Intermediate Outcome 4.1: Sustainability of agriculture, food and forestry-related land, biological and water resource use

The year in review

MAF is now a sustainable development agency and a major area of activity has been identifying our contribution to sustainable development. We also successfully completed work on climate change and water allocation issues. MAF is also working closely with the land-based sectors to promote and encourage target setting to manage the impacts of discharges from farms.

Performance measures:

• We published the first of our Perspectives Papers on sustainable development: The Sustainable Development of New Zealand's Agriculture and Forestry, which describes a sustainable development framework for the sectors.
• In November 2006, Cabinet agreed to a National Policy Statement covering water quality and allocation. This is expected to be issued for public consultation in 2007/08. We are making steady progress with the policy framework to improve water quality, especially by reducing waterway nitrification.
• Policies and initiatives to conserve soils and protect soil quality have improved, with Cabinet approving a policy for the sustainable management of hill country land.
• We developed a preferred policy package which formed the basis of the Sustainable Land Management and Climate Change discussion document, although Ministers' decisions to commission design of a broad-based Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) may change the shape of the overall package. We will finalise preferred policy recommendations once decisions are made on an ETS in early 2007/08.
• The proposal for a joint government-private sector partnership approach in a discussion document on Sustainable Land Management and Climate Change received overwhelming support. Our paper that sets out a draft strategy and process for engaging with the sectors has been circulated around other departments for comment.

The year ahead

We will work with the sector to develop a joint programme of action on Sustainable Land Management and Climate Change for submission to Cabinet in March 2008. However, there are still major challenges ahead regarding Māori interests in water and the impact of climate change policy. We are also closely networked with, and watching, sustainability developments in Australia, the US and the EU. We will continue our involvement in negotiating multilateral environmental agreements and monitoring the Convention on Biological Diversity.

“Being the nexus between the economic and the environmental sphere of influence puts MAF in a unique position in the public service.”
Paul Stocks, Assistant Director-General (Strategy and Performance)

MEETING THE MARKET, SUSTAINING THE ENVIRONMENT Consumers around the world are looking more closely into the attributes of their purchases. The full lifecycle of their production, processing and transport and the effects this has on the global and local environments. As trade expands and economies develop, the environmental effects of New Zealand's production are increasingly important in ensuring access to overseas markets and meeting consumer demands. New Zealanders also want our next generations to enjoy the same, or better, environmental quality and availability of natural resources. Safeguarding the functioning of the biophysical environment and upholding environmental quality is therefore not only important to our society but is one of the biggest market opportunities for our sectors! MAF has worked on some significant projects this year to keep New Zealand "on the ball" in this area. These included climate change and sustainable land management, the Sustainable Water Programme of Action and the first of a series of papers outlining the sustainable development of agriculture and forestry in New Zealand.

Intermediate Outcome 4.2: Protection from biosecurity pests of the economic, environmental, recreational and cultural values and benefits associated with land, biological and water environments

“The 'Check, Clean, Dry' campaign was hellishly important - it could only come from MAF's Biosecurity New Zealand.”
Otago Regional Council)

The year in review

We work hard to protect New Zealand's environment from biosecurity pests without focusing solely on their economic impacts. Some biodiversity and natural heritage outcomes may have lost out to economic drivers in the past, but these are now part of the wider objectives where MAF focuses its efforts.

“We will always ask ourselves if we could have done more to stop a pest entering New Zealand.”
Barry O'Neil, Assistant Director-General (Biosecurity)

Performance measures:

• We developed a standard process and principles for making risk management decisions across the biosecurity system. The implementation phase is the next step.
• We developed a new incursion response system which will be implemented next year. It will increase efficiency through the use of standard processes and procedures across all sectors and by ensuring staff are well trained.
• We improved our capability to manage high impact pests and will continue to do so. We completed policies and plans for priority pests and diseases (including Avian Influenza and Atypical Scrapie) and will complete the prioritisation of high impact pests next year.
• We undertook a review of the strategic approach to, and identification of, compliance issues within the biosecurity system. It identified a set of tools to support a whole-of-system compliance strategy which we plan to implement over the next three to five years.

The year ahead

As well as implementing the new initiatives developed this year, next year we will strive for more partnerships with stakeholders and to gain a better understanding of potential economic opportunities for established pests. For example, undaria is a type of seaweed currently deemed a biosecurity pest, but overseas it is used for human consumption and domestically it could be used to feed cultivated paua.

Intermediate Outcome 4.3: Protection of Māori biologically-based economic resources

The year in review

The role of our Māori Strategy Unit is to promote a greater awareness of Māori issues and concerns within MAF, increase our understanding of the Treaty of Waitangi and help the Ministry develop more effective relationships with Māori. Our current focus is on building our capability to manage the Māori interests in our activities and in the wider agriculture, food and forestry sectors.

Performance measures:

• Our Māori Strategy Unit operates both internally and externally to facilitate input by Māori into MAF's work. Internally this is achieved by providing advice and training and running the MAF academy, and externally by direct kanohi ki te kanohi (face to face) discussions and working across government agencies especially with ERMA, MfE and the Department of Conservation.
• We saw increased Māori input in the development of our planning, policy development, research, standards setting and operational activities. We have involved our Māori Strategy Unit in our organisation-wide planning and in policy development.
• We directly involved Māori entities in a range of projects, including the Draft Science Strategy and the Didymo Long Term Management Programme. We worked alongside and consulted with local Māori during incursion responses to determine the significance of impacts for Māori.

The year ahead

We recognise we need a better understanding of Māori concerns with regard to taonga, economic resources and risk perceptions. We also need to build better relationships with Māori and train and raise awareness among our staff of Māori concerns and how these are best addressed.

“Government policy makers need to stop looking at Maori through a risk lens, as this misses opportunities for collaborative work.”
George Ria, Director, Maori Strategy Unit

TOP FIVE, DEAD OR ALIVE

When pests do slip through our borders, their impact can be disastrous. We coordinate the control, management or eradication of these pests with the help of many other groups including government, industry, interest groups and the public. Below are five significant pest species we have been working on over the year.

Red Imported Fire Ant	This ant would seriously impact New Zealand's outdoor lifestyle and environment. Its aggressive nature and venomous sting can destroy young birds, reptiles and native invertebrate communities and present human health risks. Its nest building can damage infrastructure including roads, farm equipment, and electrical units. Potential economic impact: $665M over the initial 23 years, $318M annually thereafter. Action: A nest discovered in July 2006 was destroyed and extensive surveillance carried out around the site detected no further ants. Areas which could not be surveyed were treated with insecticidal ant baits.
Southern Saltmarsh Mosquito photo: Mark Disbury, NZ Biosecure	This mosquito is a vicious day-time biter, capable of transmitting Ross River Virus. It is an ongoing concern, and has been eliminated from seven different sites during the previous eight years. Potential economic impact: Between $24M and $93M over the next 20 years (excluding un-quantifiable nuisance costs). Action: We achieved eradication at one site but efforts continue in four other sites across New Zealand. Although scientific experts give eradication a 50 percent probability of success, we hope to declare eradication within the next three years.
Styela (Sea Squirt)	This invasive marine species was first discovered in 2005, but established as early as 2002. It could impose significant management costs on New Zealand's aquaculture industry and highlights the global maritime biosecurity risk of biofouling. Potential economic impact: Estimated at between $13M and $240M over 21 years. Action: Because eradication was not feasible our activities focused on slowing its spread. We researched the organism, surveyed high-risk locations, provided signage and public education, and worked with industry and the public on management strategies. Currently, there are no reports of the pest establishing in high value areas (e.g. the Marlborough Sounds).
Varroa Mite	This mite is a parasite of honey bees initially detected in the South Island in June 2006 (had already established in the North Island). The damage to bee populations could potentially devastate the crop and pasture systems they pollinate. Potential economic impact: Between $198M and $433M over the next 35 years. Action: We began a programme in August 2006 to slow its spread in the South Island and educate beekeepers in its management. The Controlled Area declared in the Tasman and Marlborough districts, preventing movement of potentially contaminated material, was successful with no varroa found outside the area.
Didymo (Rock Snot)	This single-celled aquatic plant was first detected in October 2004. It forms mats of dense algal blooms covering all river surfaces, including other plants, logs and debris. Potential economic impact: Between $58M and $285M over eight years from 2004/05. Action: We carried out an intensive public campaign to keep the North Island free of the pest. We also developed a long-term management programme in partnership with others, aiming to slow its spread and protect valued sites and at-risk species. Our science work next year will focus on developing a potential control tool.

Intermediate Outcome 4.4: Protection of Māori biologically-based cultural resources

The year in review

We have been building stronger relationships with Māori, enabling them to express their concerns about biosecurity incursions and responses. We have begun to ensure Māori input on key initiatives and have gained recognition that we are on the right track. We have also been working on building networks among Māori on the issue of climate change.

Performance measures:

• Increasing staff awareness of Māori needs and aspirations and how these can be best met while enhancing our biosecurity system is an on-going process. We directly involved our Māori Strategy Unit in key work streams, specific programmes related to tikanga Māori and Te Reo Māori, and staff induction programmes.
• We worked to enhance our relationships with Māori by direct engagement in pest incursions (including didymo education) and other projects.
• We incorporated Māori input into our Biosecurity New Zealand communications strategy. We are still developing our organisation-wide communications strategy that will incorporate Māori input.

The year ahead

Our main challenges are building capacity within MAF and addressing capability disparities between government organisations. We will continue to develop training programmes to increase awareness of Māori perspectives among our staff to facilitate better external engagement.

Contact for Enquiries

Strategy and Performance Group
Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry
Pastoral House
25 The Terrace
PO Box 2526, Wellington

Tel: +64 4 894 0100
Fax: +64 4 894 0738 Contact this person