3.7 INDUSTRY VIEWS ON MAF'S ROLE OVERALL
The staff member who is presently the primary contact between MAF and industry organisations applying for levies is well regarded and a number of representatives made comments such as "without his support we would not have got through the process". However, MAF as a whole is not seen as providing support to industry during the process. It was noted by several interviewees that there might be a conflict between MAF's policing role and its role as an adviser to industry. AF itself considers that while it "has a role to administer the Act, on the other hand it accepts the responsibility of assisting the industry groups to understand and use the Act for their purposes".
The length of time taken to assess applications is seen as excessive by industry and the uncertainty during that period clearly imposes extra stress on industry organisations. There is a perception that although the Levy Order becomes the top priority and main focus of the industry organisation for at least one year, taking most if not all of the voluntary and often professional, time available to the organisation, it is not accorded the same priority by MAF.
The fact that MAF, because of liability considerations, is no longer prepared to provide a definitive statement of whether the requirements of the legislation with respect to the ballot paper have been met, before the referendum is held, is seen as unsatisfactory. Industry feels that there must be a point at which a ballot paper is deemed to have satisfied all legal requirements, is checked off, and there is no further possibility that it will be declared to be invalid at a later stage. Such a check-off point would eliminate the risk of significant wasted expenditure and loss of credibility for the industry organisation if it has to repeat the ballot. Increasing legal caution with respect to what is required in order to fulfil the provisions of the Act is a source of dissatisfaction in other areas as well. The fact that any difference between the basis of support, and the referendum, and the basis on which the levy is struck is now seen to be "significant" and caused difficulty for the Herbage Seeds Sub-section of Federated Farmers. It may well affect a number of Levy Orders due for renewal in the near future.
One of the main concerns is that, while queries are pleasantly and efficiently answered as they are raised during the process, MAF will not give advice at the outset on how to begin the process. Many groups felt that some type of facilitated workshop, at which parameters were defined and an action plan drawn up, would be of great value. One organisation considered that lack of initial contact with MAF's legal advisers resulted in considerable additional work at a late stage when significant re-writing of the ballot paper was required in response to legal concerns raised. While MAF staff report that they are always willing to meet with industry organisations at the outset, several groups feel that this meeting does not meet all of their requirements in terms of information on exactly how to proceed. Without the support and advice of the New Zealand Fruitgrowers Federation, small groups such as the Passionfruit and Tamarillo Growers Associations believe that they could not have completed the process.
Organisations who made the earliest Levy Orders report that changes in the interpretation of the Act caused them considerable difficulties and they believe that MAF itself did not understand the Act sufficiently well from the outset. This led to the preparation of the Users Guide by MAF in 1994 and its revision in 1997.
| © MAF 2000 |  |
|
| MAFnet Help | Important Disclaimer |
Contact for Enquiries
Senior Policy Analyst
Sector Performance Policy
MAF Policy
Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry
PO Box 2526
Wellington
NEW ZEALAND
Phone: +64 4 894 0690
Contact this person
