It was called the Primary Industries Strategy Coordination Group (PISCG), including the heads of the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI), the Ministry for the Environment (MfE), Trade and Enterprise and the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE). Also, there were the Federation of Māori Authorities, the forestry, seafood and wine industries, the chairs of Beef + Lamb NZ, DairyNZ and Horticulture NZ and Mike Petersen.
My point was that talk-fests held behind closed doors have no place deciding our future.
My article received an interesting reaction, mainly one of denial. Two people told me I’d got my facts wrong, which irritated me.
As a result, I put in a series of Official Information Act (OIA) requests to MPI and what a circus that was. I’ve been using the OIA since it became law 39 years ago and I expect government departments and ministries to obfuscate. MPI turned obfuscation into an art form.
My initial request was filed on June 5, 2020. By law MPI was required to respond to me in 20 working days, which would have been July 3. The response I received was much later on July 30, and I didn’t receive a full response until September 8.
The minutes of the meetings were, in a word, underwhelming.
As background, the Primary Sector Council was established amongst great fanfare in April 2018. That morphed early last year into the Primary Industries Strategy Coordination Group. Its aim was to build on the “success” of the Primary Sector Council “to support New Zealand’s economic recovery both at home and overseas”.
A worthy aim but actions speak louder than words.
I was told the PISCG ‘included a cross section of sector groups and leaders. It doesn’t.
There was an ‘Establishment Group’ meeting on February 24 last year. It decided on issues such as terms of reference for the group, four key priorities and an update of Taiao principles.
There are worthy issues discussed but nothing new or earth shattering. I was interested to see regenerative agriculture touted as a means of reducing carbon emissions.
The next meeting was to be held on May 1, where MPI was to provide a “strategic document”. If that happened they didn’t give me the minutes as they are required by law to do.
Such is the urgency of the group that there was a meeting on July 1. The minutes of that meeting were not finalised by July 30, 29 days later.
I found that amazing as the meeting discussed, amongst other things, the release of the Fit for a Better World document, which was a culmination of efforts from 2018.
The PISCG has further morphed into the Food and Fibre Partnership Group. The people involved are the same.
In Farmers Weekly’s March 22 issue, the Food and Fibre Partnership chair Mike Petersen told us that “no one is interested in a talkfest; my role is to ensure we are connected to complement sector work to get action, get work done and see results”. That’s all very worthy.
I find the whole deal unconvincing.
For a start, they are talking about fibre, which is mainly wool in New Zealand. I’m unaware of any fibre expertise within the group.
They’ve talked about involvement across the sector, yet they’ve ignored Federated Farmers, which I find bizarre.
It’s fine having the chairs of DairyNZ and Beef + Lamb there, but those organisations look after the product, Feds look after the farmer.
Further, it is Feds that do all the donkey work with local and regional government plans, the documents that dictate how a farmer can farm. The levy organisations don’t.
In addition, if you’re considering our products and markets, I fail to see how you can be effective without the Dairy Companies Association or the Meat Industry Association.
Both organisations are intimately involved with getting our products to market. To have an organisation deciding NZ’s future and not including Feds, the MIA or DCANZ is arrogant.
They also need meaningful academic input.
And why all the secrecy?
We talk about open government but we’ve had these organisations operating below the radar since 2018.
Even when they’re presented with OIA requests they go into denial. Further, the minutes of the meetings I was provided with are extremely general, bordering on the irrelevant. It is all just a mighty talkfest.
There is no challenging of results, serious scrutiny, meaningful consultation or accountability.
What we have is a hand-picked group operating behind closed doors. It’s Essential Freshwater all over again, leading to the inevitable train wreck.
If the group wants me to take them remotely seriously, they will include all components of the sector and consult.
In summary, more openness, less meetings, meaningful consultation and action ahead of talk.
