Special Debates — Agriculture

Thank you, Madam Chair. It gives me great pleasure to rise as the chair of the Primary Production Committee to lead off the Estimates 2021/22 debate for agriculture. For 2021/22, the funding sought for agriculture totalled $293.8 million, which is about the same as the previous year’s estimated actual spend of $293 million. The committee discussed the funding of $37.2 million over four years for integrated farm planning. This initiative aims to ensure that 40,000 farmers and growers have access to farm planning to improve performance and environmental outcomes.

The committee also discussed Sustainable Food and Fibre Futures, which has an estimated expenditure of $79.8 million in 2021/22. The Minister told the committee that Sustainable Food and Fibre Futures was created to support innovation in New Zealand’s food and fibre sectors by co-investing in projects, and that the fund will focus on leading new ideas and projects for the future.

The committee acknowledged the difficulties that the Canterbury farmers have faced following the flooding in late May of 2021, and we thanked the Ministry for Primary Industries for their work in this area to support our affected farmers. We discussed that, in June, the Government allocated $500,000 to assist the recovery, and the Minister told us that rural support trusts, councils, Federated Farmers, and other organisations were on the ground looking at what needed to be done and how best to distribute the money. I note that following our hearing, the Government announced an additional $4 million.

The committee noted that Budget 2021 provided around $68 million for the eradication and long-term management of Mycoplasma bovis, and this compares with the estimated actual expenditure of $143.5 million in the 2020-21 year. The reduction in funding is the result of the prevalence of the disease reducing.

As the chair, I sincerely thank the Minister, the officials, the clerks, and the select committee members for a thorough and robust set of hearings. Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Well, time is short—if we can restart the clock, please. I’ve had this portfolio since 29 August, and I’ve been waiting for this opportunity for a long time. I wasn’t on the committee, and these reports were done in July 2021. So the trade Minister has come back to the House—congratulations on the UK trade deal. But, as you can imagine, in my role, having the first opportunity, there’s time for 20 questions. If you can’t answer them all in the time frame tonight, I’m happy to have the answers by the close of business tomorrow before we go home for Christmas.

So, on the clear obligation to identify areas of significant natural areas, the Minister said that in some cases the value of farms might increase if they have indigenous vegetation. Can he please tell of cases he knows where this has happened? On integrated farm plans, the Minister said funding could provide 100 additional professionals. How many of these professionals are in place? What is the time frame for the integrated farm plans? The Minister told the committee that the Government would offer support for irrigation in ways other than Crown Irrigation Investments. What are those ways? How are they being progressed? The Minister reported class exceptions for an additional 200 dairy workers and 50 vets, saying there was not enough managed isolation and quarantine for 500 workers. How did we end up with three dairy workers out of the 200?

The Minister said he would be seeking advice on all aspects of the climate commission’s report relating to agriculture. What advice has he received to date? How much more broadband has been rolled out under his rural communities portfolio? On He Waka Eke Noa, the Minister said places like England and Europe will be looking to New Zealand to see how it implements a levy, and New Zealand can show the way. What discussions has he had about this while out on his trade trips? Besides participating in He Waka Eke Noa, what other initiatives, along with asparagopsis seaweed, are under way to help farmers and growers lower their gas emissions, and how are they progressing? What responses has the Minister had from stakeholders so far, farmers and iwi, in particular to greenhouse gas emissions options?

The Minister told the committee, which I wasn’t on at the time—I’m very pleased to be back on the Primary Production Committee, the best committee in Parliament—he had “grave concerns”, and that’s a quote, about the planting of radiata pine in permanent forest sinks. What has he done to protect productive farmland being planted with pine trees? How will the planting of radiata trees into permanent forest affect the progress of Fit for a Better World? How will the outcomes and milestones for projects funded under the One Billion Trees Programme be measured and reported going forward?

Why is the Minister opposed to Fonterra’s capital structure, voted on by shareholders? Would he be happier if it ended up in foreign ownership like Westland? Where is the evidence of reputational damage that he has spoken about relating to the export of live animals? What is the Minister’s plan to achieve the productivity, sustainability and inclusiveness targets in the Fit for a Better World roadmap? What milestones are you aiming for in the next 10 years? How is progress towards the roadmap targets measured and reported?

How much has been invested in the Sustainable Land Management and Climate Change research programme? What returns and outcomes is the Minister seeing, and, in addition to publishing on the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) website the results of these reports, have they been communicated?

Then, in expecting that publicly funded buildings must be built out of wood, as the Estimates say, how does the Minister expect to increase value for wood processors? How many potential successful MPI wellbeing initiatives for farmers and growers—or how are the initiatives being measured on wellbeing? Why do reports on catchment groups have to be reported to both MPI and the Ministry for the Environment, and why can this not be consolidated; and then what steps are MPI involved in to stop COVID-19 getting into our meat and milk manufacturing plants? With that, I wait for the answers.

Thank you, Madam Chair. When was the Minister first made aware of New Zealand’s commitment to the methane pledge, and was he made aware of New Zealand’s methane pledge by the Minister of Climate Change before his departure to COP26? What will the methane pledge mean for the cost of on-farm operations and, by virtue, the cost of living here domestically for domestic consumables given the heightened international market prices? When will the Government and the Minister and the Government and his Ministry for Primary Industries officials seek to reconcile and fully compensate ANZCO, the owners of Five Star feedlot, and why, after several previous attempts in select committee, he still can’t answer what the final compensation figures will be, given the farms first became infected in 2018?

Last question: how can farmers have confidence in Overseer after several iterations failed, and it will now be reused as an accounting tool to measure on-farm emissions—i.e., methane and carbon dioxide?

Well, thank you, Madam Chair. I think it’s quite telling that we haven’t had the Minister answer a single question yet, when there have been quite a few come up, and perhaps it’s been a little bit difficult for him to keep up with all the questions or to keep abreast of the challenges and issues that are being presented in his portfolio. Now, if that’s a bit too much for him, I’m happy to break it down and just keep it to one or two simple questions that perhaps he might be able to grace the industry with by answering.

So, on that basis, I’d like to get an understanding from him around what advocacy he has done to ensure that Immigration New Zealand better understands the needs of rural New Zealand. We have seen far too many instances this year where we have not been able to get the workforce we need across the borders, whether it’s dairy workers or vets or, more recently, rural contractors. It’s not good enough that it has taken this long, and it seems clear that the Minister and his ministry haven’t been advocating enough with Immigration New Zealand to get those exemptions in place for our primary sector. Those are critical roles. So what is he doing to ensure we don’t have these sorts of hiccups again?

Now, in terms of advocacy, as well, rural-proofing was something we heard from the Minister early on when he became the Minister of Agriculture as being a key priority. Every piece of legislation would be rural-proof. So I’m interested to hear how that work is going, what he is doing to ensure rural-proofing is occurring, because we’ve heard from Ministry for Primary Industry (MPI) officials that they are seeing consistent issues around a lack of consultation, and also increased costs being placed on the rural sector through a whole raft of legislative pieces of work going through. So what is he doing to minimise the impact on rural New Zealand, if anything?

Then, finally, from the horticulture perspective—because I’m concerned I’m giving him too many questions now—MPI have commissioned the New Zealand Institute of Economic Research to do a survey of importers in relation to post-entry quarantine requirement. I’m interested to know whether he has received that survey or report back yet, and, if so, what action he is planning to take on that, because I’m hearing from the horticulture sector a number of concerns around time frames, their ability to get quarantine space, how they can go through that process, the lack of import health standards, for a whole range of products like avocados or hops—why haven’t we got those? Is he planning to put those in place? So I’d appreciate some insights into those areas. Thank you.

I thought the Minister was going to stand up. I just had a question that I did want to ask him before he does stand up to start answering the questions. How many new entrants to the industry have been attracted under the programmes that he’s been telling us are going to work rather than bring the immigrants in? And just a follow up to my letter that I wrote to him and Minister Faafoi recently: what work’s being done to increase the understanding in Immigration New Zealand of the seasonal nature of some of the work that goes on in our primary industries?

It’s a pleasure to take my mask off. Look, I welcome the opportunity to answer some of the questions that have been put to the committee, and I’d like to, firstly, acknowledge the Primary Production Committee for their good work. As was said by the Opposition, I think this is the best select committee in Parliament, and, indeed, they did do a thorough job of asking some of the questions. There are a lot of questions, and I’ll try and work through them.

I guess, on the one of labour, or that is workforce in particular, it’s really good to hear that the National Party wants so much labour. We do, too—that’s Labour Party. They probably are referring to workforce needs across the private sector. Firstly, how many new entrants? Over 8,000 people have come into the primary sectors through the efforts of not just the Ministry for Primary Industries but, in fact, we have spent on behalf of taxpayers millions of dollars through Opportunity Grows Here. It is a very successful campaign working actively with tertiary institutions to train people over the last period, particularly around COVID, as we have understood the need across the sector, because of the borders being blocked for workers in all of the sectors. Indeed, it’s across our whole economy.

Their question has been—so, firstly, 8,000 new people have come in; secondly, how many have we allowed in? It is a hard job, working with the border closed, but, next to health, the primary sectors have been the second-biggest beneficiary of opportunities to come through the border: health workers first; primary industry workers second. That’s something that we shouldn’t take for granted, when every other sector has been crying out for people to come into our economy. I think it is important that the sector actually acknowledges and says thank you to the Minister of Immigration. He has had a very, very tough job, I have to say, and—I’m just trying to get the figures here, of course—we have allowed in 5,100 primary sector workers.

So we’re asked about why not the full complement of dairy. Well, there were issues around the claims of the skills required in the dairy industry. I’m not going to go into all of those areas, other than to say Government has work cooperatively with the sectors, and most of those sectors had been appreciative. Most recently, of course, the 200, which was the number requested by the rural contractors to come in. Yes, there are still issues to get through managed isolation and quarantine, and the changing environment that is not just Omicron, which adds to the risks, but actually the system that we’re running here. We’ve let in people who can shear sheep; people who can work in woolsheds. We have let in vets. We have let in people who can pick fruit. Tomorrow morning, we’ll release the Situation and Outlook for Primary Industries, and I hope there’s as much interest in that report as there’s in—or, actually, a hell of a lot more than in the debate that we’re hearing here tonight.

Can I say that the primary sectors have done spectacularly well through what has been a very challenging time. I want to acknowledge the efforts of people at every level of that sector. Whether it’s working in the freezing works, whether it’s working on the farm, or whether it’s being one of the chief executives trying to find space on ships, this has been a challenging time, and the primary sectors have done well for our country and for our people and for our rural communities, and there has been consideration by Government all through this process. Money has been given out to assist directly and indirectly. Indeed, the figures tomorrow will show that that has been a good investment.

Can I just go back—there are many, many questions. I’m not trying to avoid them; I’m not quite sure where to start or where to stop, other than to say that in terms of integrated farm plans, they are an objective of this Government to try and work with farmers. Indeed, I had a discussion this morning with a group of farmers, trying to say—these are farmers who are implementing best practice—“How can you share your knowledge and your passion with lots of other farmers?”, and that’s the basis on which we are working. We’re not saying we can develop the plan and tell you what you should do from Wellington; we’re saying we want to work with you.

Indeed, the first thing, though—so, what about fresh water? OK, we didn’t get that exactly right, but the intent or, indeed, the need for us to make progress on freshwater quality is absolute. Indeed, we have reviewed the whole process and come back with a set of proposals around intensive winter grazing, around stock exclusion, and around freshwater standards that I think the vast majority of farmers—visionary farmers—will see as quite sensible. It will enable us to get back the social licence that we have in some areas lost.

Sustainable Food and Fibre Futures fund—SFFF—has given literally hundreds of millions of dollars out to people who are showing innovative vision, innovative ideas, and put them on the table. We are supporting them moving forward.

The issue of climate change and our obligations there—a big, challenging one. He Waka Eke Noa, a Government-initiated but industry-driven—I guess it’s been a project, but it’s actually been a collaboration that delivered a draft report that will give us some progress. But we need to go further.

What, I was asked, am I doing offshore? Well, I am listening and, in fact, I have—and I wished I could table it in the House here tonight, and indeed I will. It is a report from Tesco asking all their suppliers, firstly, to move to renewable energy now, and, secondly, to have in place a plan for how they will reduce their carbon emissions by the end of 2022. All of these requirements are coming on us as food producers supplying food into the discerning markets of the UK, which we’ll have better access into; into the EU; and, indeed, it will be into all other markets eventually, and so we must move through this.

Before I sit down, I’d just like to thank again the primary sectors for their efforts and their discipline in assisting with the eradication of Mycoplasma bovis. There was one question regarding Five Star Beef. Can I say that we are working with them to ensure that they get fair payment but we minimise the true cost. We allow them to continue to operate for as long as is sensible, given that if we were to then eliminate or take all the stock off that and they were to be re-infected, that would be a huge cost to the farming sector. It would be a disaster for Five Star. So when we do this, and we do de-stock Five Star, we need to know that that will be close to the end of the Mycoplasma bovis eradication programme.

We’re on path. I want to thank everyone. It’s been tough for those directly in the firing line of that, who’ve had to get rid of their stock, but, indeed, we will achieve a world first and, hopefully, eradicate Mycoplasma bovis. That’s one of many, many positive things that have come from the primary sectors.

Thank you, Madam Chair. To the Minister, you described the work of He Waka Eke Noa, the primary sector climate action group, as a project. You describe that Tesco are asking suppliers, agricultural groups to identify their carbon reductions—not methane, but carbon—and to describe their pathway to renewable energy. Well, fortunately, New Zealand already has that pathway. It’s called the emissions trading scheme.

So my question to you, Minister, is what will the Government do if farmers reject the premise of He Waka Eke Noa to put a price on methane when there is no other comparable country in the world putting a price on methane from growing food and fibre—no other country—and if the Minister insists that the Government will force farmers to price methane, what is the cost per tonne for that methane, Minister? What is the cost per tonne for that methane that farmers will be required to pay when a committee established by this Government tells them this is the price they must pay? What is that cost per tonne, and does the Minister think that’s acceptable? What will that cost per tonne of methane add to a kilo of beef mince in the supermarket, a kilo of cheese, or a 2-litre milk in the supermarket?

Minister, we’d appreciate an answer on behalf of New Zealand consumers and families. Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Look, I just wanted to come back to the question I asked earlier in relation to the horticulture sector. There’s been a lot of concern around the costs and the challenges of getting quarantine space, for importing products, and I’m really keen to understand what work the Minister is doing there. I know that the Ministry for Primary Industries commissioned the New Zealand Institute of Economic Research to do a study of importers around the post-entry quarantine requirements, so has he received that report yet; if so, what work is he doing off the back of that?

I also understand that they’re looking to move to a full cost-recovery model for those quarantine facilities, which is a significant change from where we are now. So what’s the likely cost implication on users, is that model actually going to be where he lands, and, if so, by when?

Then, lastly on the horticulture sector, what workforce issues is he aware of arising in the sector over the coming season, and how is he planning to address that, as well? Thank you.

Look, very briefly, just to answer that one: the post-entry quarantine facilities—look, the Government has committed, after years of neglect and the running down the capacity in that area, to build a new facility, and we hope to do that on a site that has yet to be confirmed because there are issues to work through. It is a site that is logical, that will be efficient, and, hopefully, it will minimise the cost. But there will be a cost, and that should be carried by the industry. It will be user-pays, as it should be, but it will allow, we hope, the efficient facilitation of new plant material into the country, biosecurity-checked, ensuring no harm comes with that and enabling the industry for horticulture, in particular, to get on and innovate. So we’re working on that to have that in place as quickly as we can.

In terms of workforce issues, look, we’re working very closely with all the sectors so that we get the figures right, so that when the sectors ask for spots in managed isolation and quarantine or how we can actually get enough people into the country, whether it be through the Recognised Seasonal Employer scheme or through the Pacific, and that, actually, we get the numbers right and we fully utilise those people, and that we don’t have them sitting around doing nothing or we have them in the wrong place. So we’re working with each of the sectors to make sure we get it right.

Minister, very quickly, could you please—and I asked this question before; you didn’t answer it. When were you first made aware about New Zealand’s commitment to the methane pledge? And, overwhelmingly, again—I’ve asked the question again—how can farmers have confidence in the Overseer after several iterations? You know how many it’s had, and it’s now going to be used as an accounting tool to measure on-farm emissions—i.e., methane.

Look, sorry, there were many questions; I didn’t mean to avoid them. The methane pledge, look, was something brought to my attention by the Minister of Climate Change—that we were going to sign up to this. Indeed, we went to the sectors, to Beef + Lamb New Zealand and they said, “Yes, we want to support this.”, because, actually, it’s an international challenge. We’ve signed up to that, and we’ve agreed to work with the primary sectors to achieve those targets. Many of those will be achieved over time. Offshore, the focus is on leakages from gas pipelines. From New Zealand, it’s around biological, biogenic methane, but we can work through that in a way that says New Zealand is committed to reduce emissions in every way we can.

💬 Mark Cameron: So you’ve only known this year, Minister?

So I knew about this and we endorsed it, and we supported the Minister of Climate Change at COP26.

Someone has to seek the call, or I’ll—all right, we’ll change Ministers at this point.

Local Government