Under the heading LEVY FUNDING, NZBI states:
Two methods of funding have been tried. Initially this was based on hive numbers and found to be clumsy, leading to incorrect reporting. In 2003 this was changed to an apiary levy as it proved easier to determine correct reporting.
This is not correct.
The hive numbers levy referred to was for the funding of the National Bkprs Assn, and lasted from the middle 1970s until 1996. At that point, the NBA successfully obtained a Commodity Levies Act levy based on apiary numbers. We chose to do that at the time, and for a variety of reasons. Every levying system the bee industry has *ever* developed has faced criticism, remember. For some reason, people don't like to be levied. Go figure...
Toward the end of the hive levy, the NBA recognised the deficiencies in the particular regulations. There could be no concept of "a fine". It was not at all easy to turn any debt collection over to an agency - as that *particular* levy legislation did not "establish" a debt. We often had to resort to legal rather than civil actions.
But remember, too, that the Privacy Act had just come into place - that probably had more impact on the choices and design of a levy system back then. And until the NBA had a Pest Management Plan in place, the 'ownership' of the apiaries database was with the Govt - not the NBA, remember...
When the NBA was unsuccessful in 'renewing' the Comm Levy when it expired, the Minister responded by allowing for a levy (using the Biosecurity Act) - and it was based on apiary numbers, as it had been for more than 5 years prior.
In 2020 the Management Agency went back to the original method.
"Following consulation led by the Management Agency that the Minister considered adequate and appropriate, the Minister agreed to the proposed changes to the levy collection methodology."
There. That says the same thing, but takes away the implication that this was an arbitrary, unilateral decision. Just saying...