Perceptions of MAF's regulatory impact on the grain and seed industry
5 Summary
Key findings
The findings of this review indicate MAF is performing well as a regulator and that:
- MAF's processes and systems to manage its compliance requirements are generally working well;
- the industry understands the importance of biosecurity;
- the industry reported no issues with MAF's management of the Commodity Levy Act;
- MAF's compliance requirements are reported to have few negative impacts on business' economic growth and productivity, and MAF's biosecurity requirements return large positive impacts;
- MAF's compliance requirements are not perceived to be duplicated or outdated;
- the MAF Biosecurity New Zealand website is perceived to contain all the required information (although navigation is reportedly difficult sometimes);
- interviewees understand MAF's role within government and believe MAF generally performs better than other regulators;
- MAF is perceived to have a good relationship with the grain and seed industry;
- MAF is perceived to be fair and consistent in its interactions with businesses.
The findings also indicate there are a number of areas of business performance that potentially require further consideration by MAF. These are:
- clarify differences in roles between the Environmental Risk Management Authority (ERMA) and MAF in relation to the HSNO Act;
- review the impacts of import requirements on businesses levels of innovation;
- reassess countries on the Importing Countries Phytosanitary Requirements register;
- reassess timeframes for import clearances;
- examine interface between Customs and MAF to streamline certain requirements where possible;
- consider interfacing processes conducted by both ERMA and MAF;
- ensure consistency at a national level for import requirements;
- review MAF website to improve accessibility of import requirements;
- up-skill MAF inspectors' expertise and knowledge on seed and grain and the wider arable industry;
- enhance customer-centric culture and attitude among MAF staff;
- enhance collaboration with the industry;
- facilitate stakeholder relationships and improve MAF understanding of the industry;
- promote and support MAF staff authority and decision making.
The review also sheds light on a number of emerging grain and seed industry issues that may be worthy of future consideration by MAF. These issues are:
- the industry is experiencing rapid, unpredictable change;
- bio-fuels seemingly pose a threat to New Zealand's export seed industry;
- the world is increasingly biosecurity conscious and import restrictions are getting tighter;
- farmers now have more options for land use;
- seed testers are a very skilled, yet ageing and part-time workforce.
Conclusions
The findings of this review suggest that MAF's regulatory framework for the grain and seed industry is sound and generally acceptable to the industry. Grain and seed industry members understand MAF's role in administering compliance requirements under legislation and understand the significance to their industry of MAF-administered legislation (such as the Biosecurity Act and Commodity Levy Act).
While the regulatory framework is therefore not "broken", there are some regulatory implementation issues that may require further consideration by MAF. These include ensuring consistencies across different centres, negotiating importing countries phytosanitary requirements register, considering interface opportunities with other government agencies and making information more easily accessible to the industry. On this last point there was a clear signal for more information on the difference in roles between MAF and other regulatory agencies operating in this industry (for example, Customs, ERMA).
The impact of MAF's regulatory requirements was also found to be generally acceptable to the industry. However, key issues identified were the time taken to clear imports and the perceived impediment to industry innovation from the restricted access to genetically modified and hybridised seeds.
MAF was considered to be better than, or as good as, most other regulators in New Zealand. Yet there was a call for MAF to focus on working harmoniously with the industry and to address some areas organisational attitude, particularly regarding "staff authoritarianism". There was also a concern amongst interviewees about the level of knowledge and understanding of the grain and seed industry amongst MAF staff.
The findings of this review provide a picture of MAF's performance from the perspective of the grain and seed industry. The general picture provided correlates with other stakeholder feedback MAF has received and the majority of the "issues for attention" have also been identified in earlier work. This included the following:
- Costs of Compliance for Achieving Biosecurity Clearance - the first outside-in review undertaken for MAF by PriceWaterhouseCoopers in 2005/06;
- Survey into Business Experience of Government Service Delivery - research project undertaken for MED by Colmar Brunton in August 2005.
These studies found that the standard of service provided could be improved by focusing on service quality "fundamentals" like: more knowledgeable and experienced staff, more consistent implementation, less "letter of the law" approach, better customer service/attitude, improving response times, better co-ordination between departments, and availability of the right person.
Improved regulatory implementation by MAF is therefore about continually focusing on the basics of customer service delivery. Accordingly, communication, collaboration and customer-focus appear to be the key words for MAF to consider going forward.
Contact for Enquiries
MAF Information Services
Pastoral House
25 The Terrace
PO Box 2526
Wellington, NEW ZEALAND
Fax: +64 4 894 0721
Contact this person
