Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New listings
New media comments
New resources
New calendar events
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Calendar
New events
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
Classifieds
New listings
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Reply to thread
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
New Zealand Beekeeping Forums
New Zealand Beekeeping Disease & Pests
AFB plan review
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Welcome to NZ Beekeepers+
Would you like to join the rest of our members? Feel free to sign up today.
Sign up
Message
<blockquote data-quote="NickWallingford" data-source="post: 5272" data-attributes="member: 44"><p>It is <em>not true</em> that there was 'compulsory membership of the NBA'. Under the old Hive Levy, there was a bit over 500 beekeepers with 50+ hives. So, yes, for those the membership was compulsory. For the other 5,000 beekeepers? No, they were not members of the NBA. So during the time of the PMP development, less than 10% of beekeepers were members of the NBA, as we developed the PMP.</p><p></p><p>The Commodity Levies levy changed that, moving the 'compulsion' (ie, pay the levy) down to 10+ hives. It was this levy that was raised, in part, to fund the PMP (as well as the NBA and generic marketing). But even this increase in the number of beekeepers who would pay a levy meant that there would be 1,300 beekeepers who paid the levy for the PMP - about a quarter of the country's beekeepers. None of the rest paid a levy, but they were impacted by the PMP in the same way as all other beekeepers.</p><p></p><p>But even though that large number of beekeepers did not have to pay a levy, or get a 'chance to vote' they were still absolutely impacted by the PMS. And when, a year or so after the NBA got the Commodity Levy, the Minister was prepared to approve our PMP, he *did* offer all those affected beekeepers the opportunity to make submissions about the PMP. Remember - only about a quarter of NZ's beekeepers (yes, they were now compulsory members of the NBA) developed the PMP for the good of the entire industry.</p><p></p><p>And after the NBA lost its Commodity Levy in about 2002? The Minister chose to continue with the NBA as the Management Agency, and put into place a new levy to fund it. </p><p></p><p>Beekeepers - all these who have obligations under the PMP - have never had a ballot or vote for either the PMP or the Management Agency that administers it. And so far as I know, there have never been any such votes for <em>any of the other pest management programmes</em>, either regional or national. Effective biosecurity and the ability to respond to pests and diseases is just not something that can be sorted out by a 'vote of all those affected'. </p><p></p><p>Both the PMP and Management Agency are, ultimately, the decision of the Minister...</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="NickWallingford, post: 5272, member: 44"] It is [I]not true[/I] that there was 'compulsory membership of the NBA'. Under the old Hive Levy, there was a bit over 500 beekeepers with 50+ hives. So, yes, for those the membership was compulsory. For the other 5,000 beekeepers? No, they were not members of the NBA. So during the time of the PMP development, less than 10% of beekeepers were members of the NBA, as we developed the PMP. The Commodity Levies levy changed that, moving the 'compulsion' (ie, pay the levy) down to 10+ hives. It was this levy that was raised, in part, to fund the PMP (as well as the NBA and generic marketing). But even this increase in the number of beekeepers who would pay a levy meant that there would be 1,300 beekeepers who paid the levy for the PMP - about a quarter of the country's beekeepers. None of the rest paid a levy, but they were impacted by the PMP in the same way as all other beekeepers. But even though that large number of beekeepers did not have to pay a levy, or get a 'chance to vote' they were still absolutely impacted by the PMS. And when, a year or so after the NBA got the Commodity Levy, the Minister was prepared to approve our PMP, he *did* offer all those affected beekeepers the opportunity to make submissions about the PMP. Remember - only about a quarter of NZ's beekeepers (yes, they were now compulsory members of the NBA) developed the PMP for the good of the entire industry. And after the NBA lost its Commodity Levy in about 2002? The Minister chose to continue with the NBA as the Management Agency, and put into place a new levy to fund it. Beekeepers - all these who have obligations under the PMP - have never had a ballot or vote for either the PMP or the Management Agency that administers it. And so far as I know, there have never been any such votes for [I]any of the other pest management programmes[/I], either regional or national. Effective biosecurity and the ability to respond to pests and diseases is just not something that can be sorted out by a 'vote of all those affected'. Both the PMP and Management Agency are, ultimately, the decision of the Minister... [/QUOTE]
Verification
What type of honey is New Zealand famous for?
Post reply
Forums
New Zealand Beekeeping Forums
New Zealand Beekeeping Disease & Pests
AFB plan review
Top
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…