sign up log in
Want to go ad-free? Find out how, here.

Sam McIvor joins Angus Kebbell to discuss the consequences of rapid-fire poor policy-making, how it is building unintended consequences, and leaving a trail of regulatory mess that is going to take years to fix

Rural News / opinion
Sam McIvor joins Angus Kebbell to discuss the consequences of rapid-fire poor policy-making, how it is building unintended consequences, and leaving a trail of regulatory mess that is going to take years to fix
Sheep and pond

This week on Factum-Agri, Sam McIvor, the chief executive of Beef+Lamb NZ, discusses some of the current challenges facing the farming community.

Policy change is an area that is seemingly endless for farmers. As a food producing nation that relies on export revenue and of course food security is important not only here in New Zealand but globally, I can’t help but think policy makers should be reducing unworkable and cumbersome policy to help and enable our farmers.

The ETS and afforestation are policy areas that are causing concern. Why does the Government allow emitters to offset 100% of their pollution through the ETS, and indeed support the expansion of lock-up-and-walk-away carbon forests?

McIvor: “Well, I can’t answer to why the government continues to do that because on every front it doesn't make sense."

 

"Firstly we know that we need to absolutely reduce our carbon emissions as a nation and in terms of our footprint, so allowing carbon emitters to offset 100% of their emissions is a real disincentive for them to make the hard calls about taking carbon out of the system."

"The second thing is this; you've made the point that we are a food producing nation and so let's look at the contrast here of a carbon farm versus a food producing sheep and beef farm. So what does that do to [sheep and beef]? It utilises the environment in the best way possible in terms of those resources. Secondly, it provides employment and a contribution to a rural community. Thirdly, what it does is it produces export revenue for New Zealand, we are the most export revenue exposed nation in the world so driving export revenue is really important. The red meat sector supports close to 100,000 jobs, it puts about $3,000 into every household in New Zealand every year and so what the government is doing here is cutting off our nose to spite our face."

"We know that at some point in the future that carbon price is going to return to zero and so what do we have at that point is that we have a bunch of those landowners with carbon farms that shut those gates and walk away, what does our countryside look like?"

"What does the future of our economy look like? It is just dumb stuff frankly, every other government around the world has worked it out except for our one, no other government allows 100% offsetting of their emissions. And in fact you go to somewhere like California I think it's a maximum of sort of 9% So we're just we're just miles off where we should be on this one and so for us, if we look at He Waka Eke Noa and the industry is commitment to that we're absolutely saying that before payments come in for emissions in 2025 the government absolutely has to sort out this offsetting because what we're seeing is that sheep and beef farmers and the sector have been hit on two sides. Subsidised purchase of sheep and beef farms and taking out feed production while at the same time, farmers having extra obligations and costs put on them, and they're not being fully recognized for what they're doing on farm so everybody else gets recognition but not the farmers.”

Another significant challenge for farmers is that there's no time for one policy change to embed itself and allow farmers to practically get on with the job sensibly. The current Government keeps lining up the next policy, and the next, rather than enabling our farmers, they are being burdened with unnecessary increased red tape, and McIvor says that's his staff’s challenge on a daily basis.

“One of the ways that we seek to combat that is we work closely with other organisations we work very closely with farmers on policy, and we work very closely with Dairy NZ. We've got the farming Leaders Group where we look at what are those common goals we're trying to achieve, and labour has been one we've come together on and advocated together. So we try to use all of our resources, but it's fair to say that it has been an absolute avalanche of policy and because it's been poorly thought out, you've got to do so much more work on it from an advocacy space."

It's not fine tuning the 10%, you're trying to fine tune 90%."

"So you know my challenge to the government is that you've just got to think about the way that you're doing this and at the end of the day we also know that the government policy people are knackered so they feel overwhelmed by the pressure that they're facing from their ministers."

"And so really for us, we're saying to ministers decide which one or two things are the most important, let's do a cracking good job on that, get it right get it implemented, get it in place and farmers will get on and do the job."

"Well they will continue the job they've already been doing. It’s about enablement not about telling people how they absolutely should do it in a language that nobody can understand, and that we know is impractical."

Listen to the podcast to hear the full story


Angus Kebbell is the Producer at Tailwind Media. You can contact him here.

We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.

Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.

12 Comments

Rapid fire poor policy making IS the legacy of this government and is a big reason JA lasted just 1.75 terms.

Up
4

Every other government in the world has worked it out except ours ... that sums up the Ardern Labour government nicely ...

... will Chippy make the fundamental necessary changes to their idiotic policies around offsetting carbon in the next 9 months ? ... don't hold your breath waiting ...

Stupidist bunch of thickos to ever govern Zealandia .

Up
4

If decarbonisation is the aim then short/medium term sequestration is an answer as an offset to emmissions whilst better solution are found and implemented so trees are the transitional solution. Some reasonable calculation of sequestration of other farm assets like pasture and will probably equate NZ sequestration more closely to emmisions and reduce the cost and credibility of buying overseas credits that may not be valid.

Up
3

If they are going to cherry pick and twist things like this, it is not the government that is the problem. 

Really wonder how dumb these guys think the public and politicians are, they are not doing farmers any favours.

Up
2

Does this Dairy NZ dude realise the ETS now has a reducing emissions cap?

Up
1

Which DairyNZ dude?  No DairyNZ 'dudes' quoted in this article.  

Up
0

Poor leadership from B+LNZ, in this echo chamber podcast of self-righteousness and below the line behaviors of denying, blaming, and excusing.

Deny that there is any problem (e.g. "spray and pray" defoliation using glyphosate now called "heli cropping" etc...etc..)

Blame the government (when the environmental impacts of poor farming practices are exposed and have to be regulated - due to no self-regulation)

Excusing the behavior (the sanctimonious verbal diarrhea that is farmers should be able to do what they want because ......."farmers grow food")

 

Maybe there would be more respect for farmers if government (or even the wider population) believed the ag industry leaders, but they don't. There is a very good reason for that (see above)

 

Up
3

Interesting election coming up for B&L

Up
0

I don't think the vast majority disrespect farmers at all. Its a bloody hard job.

Farmers are piling into the ETS and if the HWEN changes come in all sequestration will be in the ETS - does B and L now want that gone? They were happy when it was announced along with other farmer groups promoting it. Its a real mix of noises. I deal with 100s of farmers who would be in serious trouble without carbon. If we keep getting these weather events how many times can you afford to be washed away? Will banks keep financing you? Do your kids want to take that on?

If the price of carbon goes to zero it can then be logged. Nearly all exotic forests are not permanent anyway. Only from 1 January this year can you do this and it will come with significant caveats soon. 

Wool - well its beyond a joke now - its very sad and soul destroying but its the market.

Australia has their ETS starting by the looks - not called that.

No limits on offsets

Price setting similar to ours

Big winners are - Australian Farmers producing offsets!!!

Australia’s big polluting sites will have to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by nearly 5% a year but will face no limits on the use of carbon offsets under the Albanese government’s plan to deal with industrial emitters.

The government said it would effectively cap the price, starting at $75 a tonne of pollution and increasing annually, by offering to sell from its own pool of credits at that price. It would consult on whether to amend legislation to allow credits from overseas to be used “at a future time if warranted”.

Bowen is also considering options to protect local industry against lower cost imports from nations that do not have such strong carbon emission regulations. This includes the possibility of imposing import tariffs similar to the European Union's Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM). "We will consider this option alongside others," Bowen told national radio broadcaster ABC.

Not saying its right but its what they are doing.

Up
0

Industry has to reduce emissions by  5 %,but can use offsets to do so. Do they have to offset Thier current emissions? So effectively, either they buy 5 %more offsets per year, or actually reduce their emissions.

Up
0

They can just buy offsets - the Greens in Aus arent to happy about that - but the cost keeps going up.

At some stage we need to actually reduce emissions - trees do help but aren't the end answer.

I suppose for Australia its catchup and they are starting somewhere. Be interesting to see how it goes.

Up
0

Considering the last government wasn't going to do anything (at least for as long as they could get away with it ) , I guess it is a start.

Up
0