Reply to thread

Welcome to NZ Beekeepers+

Would you like to join the rest of our members? Feel free to sign up today.

Message: <blockquote data-quote="NickWallingford" data-source="post: 13356" data-attributes="member: 44">The Biosecurity Act, and the Pest Management Plan that was made with it, were never intended to be paragons of democratic virtue...Ultimately, just about everything gets back to the responsible Minister of the Government.There aren't any real concepts of "voting" for a PMP, or the provisions of the Act or Order that might be used.  The Minister doesn't have to establish that the people involved with the pest/disease are "happy" with any of the aspects, or whether the people who have to pay a levy are "satisfied" that all is well.The PMP is ultimately the Minister's device.  There will a range of sources of advice available, with MPI providing many/most of them.  In the case of the AFB PMP, Ministry of Primary Industries are invited to have a representative to participate in the Mgmt Board meetings.  From past meeting notes it would appear there are often more than one - it is *highly* in MPI's interests to ensure the PMP is 'properly' conducted.But whether the actions of the Mgmt Agency - his/her Management Agency - is keeping everyone happy?  Or whether they are being democratically "elected" by the levy payers?  No, that doesn't really much figure into it, I expect.  Sure, it gets heard and listened to, but I can't really imagine a Minister saying "Hey, wait - I've heard some complaints.  Let's have a *vote* to see if the stuff the agency is doing is more than 50% acceptable..."So when the Mgmt Agency *does* do something like this, with charges of exceeding its authority?  I'd be pretty confident that the Minister is aware of the controversy.  And I'd be pretty sure than any of the advisors between him and the Mgmt Agency are, too.  Any use of what might be considered "new powers" would be examined and determined - and I'd be incredibly surprised if the Mgmt Agency just decided off its own bat to decide to do something radical.I've had a pretty good look through the PMP's that have been created.  The regional plans, run by regional councils, have not interested me.  And there are only a very small handful of national PMP's.  Some details are hard to determine, but I have found very, very few concepts of voting and elections.  In all that I found, the Minister has accepted a management agency as being the best possible to deliver on the PMP outcomes.  None of them have a "voted on" membership.  Some agencies get complex, with producers voting for a selection committee that then decides the representative for an agency, etc - but certainly never in any case a structure that could work against or impede the PMP itself.  The Minister is not going to allow that sort of thing to happen, I expect.It wouldn't be typical for me to post something that doesn't involve history.  OK, our PMP *did* get voted on.  It has been the *only* PMP that ever *did* get "voted" on.  Something like 70% of beekeepers voted for a Commodity Levy, with part of that levy to pay for our PMP (back then, called a PMS).  70% of the beekeepers who would pay the levy voted YES.    I'd like to hope the Minister remembers that, too...</blockquote>

Verification: What type of honey is New Zealand famous for?

Top

Search

Search

Reply to thread