Report on Regional Public Meetings on the Biosecurity Strategy "Issues Paper"

1. Scope of this report

This report summarises the main outcomes of 15 public meetings held during October and November 2001 as part of nation-wide consultation on the Biosecurity Strategy ‘Issues Paper’.

2. Development of a Biosecurity Strategy for New Zealand

The Biosecurity Council, the Minister for Biosecurity’s advisory group, is co-ordinating the development of a comprehensive national Biosecurity Strategy for New Zealand by December 2002. A Biosecurity Strategy Development Team is managing the process for the Biosecurity Council. The strategy is intended to ensure that New Zealand’s primary production, natural environments and people’s health are adequately protected in the future from unwanted pests and diseases.

Many people and organisations with an interest in biosecurity are involved in the strategy development process, which is intended to obtain agreement on goals and objectives for New Zealand’s future biosecurity programmes. Public consultation is therefore an important aspect of the strategy development process. It gives people with an interest in biosecurity an opportunity to have their say and to contribute their ideas directly to the strategy team.

3. Public consultation on the ‘Issues Paper’

The Minister for Biosecurity released a Biosecurity Strategy: Issues Paper on 27 September 2001. It was contributed to from April to July 2001 by a wide range of biosecurity stakeholders, including government agencies and nine specially convened ‘common interest’ Stakeholder Working Groups. The Issues Paper has since been used as the base document for the recent nation-wide series of public meetings (15), regional workshops (20) and hui (7). All participants were invited to make written submissions by 31 December 2001.

The main purpose of the 15 public meetings was to confirm and add to the issues outlined in the Issues Paper and to develop ideas for dealing with them. The meetings were run as ‘inter-active working sessions’, with full participation from attendees.

The consultation process was designed to:

  • inform biosecurity stakeholders and the public about biosecurity, and the challenges ahead;
  • identify all biosecurity issues;
  • identify a wide range of strategic approaches to deal with the issues;
  • encourage discussion and debate on ideas being considered;
  • identify areas and approaches on which there is general agreement;
  • identify areas and approaches on which there is disagreement.

4. Format for the public meetings

The public meetings were widely advertised in the main daily and local newspapers. Meetings were chaired by ‘local notables’ (e.g. Regional Councillors) and facilitated by Biosecurity Strategy Development Team members. Local biosecurity officials (e.g. Regional Council Biosecurity Officers or regional Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry staff) helped to organise and support the meetings.

The agenda for the public meetings consisted of:

  1. Welcome and Introductions.
  2. A presentation on the strategy development process, including:
    • why we need a strategy;
    • what the strategy will cover;
    • where the public meetings fit into the strategy development process; and,
    • what the strategy development team wants the meeting to achieve.
  3. An exercise to identify biosecurity issues important to the participants.
  4. A series of ‘workshop’ exercises, involving small groups, to:
    • explore ideas and options for dealing with the biosecurity issues identified;
    • discuss the advantages and disadvantages of each idea or option;
    • agree on and record the findings of the group;
    • prepare a report for the meeting.
  5. A ‘report-back’ session.
  6. Summary & Concluding Remarks

The ‘workshop’ exercises used in the public meetings were well received. This approach provided participants with an opportunity to inter-act with others and contribute their ideas to the process, rather than requiring them to sit through a ‘presentation only’ style of public meeting. The biosecurity strategy team gathered useful data from the meeting exercises to assist with preparing a draft Biosecurity Strategy for a second round of public consultation in mid 2002.

5. Attendance

About 210 people attended the 15 public meetings (average 14; range 3 – 26). Table 1 gives the registered attendance details by location.

Table 1: Summary of Public Meeting Attendance

Date Location Number Attending
10 October 2001 Hamilton 12
11 October 2001 Tauranga 17
16 October 2001 Whangarei 7
17 October 2001 Auckland (Takapuna) 17
18 October 2001 Auckland (Mangere) 26
24 October 2001 Nelson 21
30 October 2001 Wellington 7
31 October 2001 Masterton 10
1 November 2001 Palmerston North 16
6 November 2001 Napier 18
7 November 2001 Rotorua 7
8 November 2001 New Plymouth 10
13 November 2001 Dunedin 3
15 November 2001 Invercargill 19
20 November 2001 Christchurch 20
TOTAL 210

6. Public meeting outputs

Participants wrote down biosecurity issues important to them as individuals and then discussed them with others in open forum. Some options for dealing with related issues were then explored in small groups. The issues and some options for dealing with them were clustered under the following broad headings and recorded on summary sheets:

  • General biosecurity issues
  • Offshore biosecurity measures
  • Biosecurity activities at the point of entry
  • Surveillance for new pests
  • Response to new pests
  • Managing existing pests

6.1 General biosecurity issues

Participants identified a range of ‘general’ biosecurity issues that cut across all biosecurity programmes and activities. The most common themes, and the associated ideas and options, were:

Funding
Many people felt that there was insufficient funding for current biosecurity programmes and that more funding and resources are required to ensure adequate protection is maintained. Some ideas to increase funding for biosecurity activities included:

  • Implement a ‘Biosecurity Tax’ and channel the funds into a consolidated fund for biosecurity.
  • Make biosecurity a ‘national good’, with the government providing full funding for all biosecurity programmes.
  • Establish government/industry/risk generator ‘partnerships’ to share the cost burden.
  • Increase instant fines at the border and other penalties to increase the available pool of funds.

Risk analysis
Risk analysis was seen by many as a critical aspect underpinning all biosecurity decisions and many felt that this area required strengthening. Some suggestions included:

  • Focus risk analysis energies on high risk/high consequence pests and pathways.
  • Significantly enhance risk analysis processes to reduce new incursions.
  • Improve database management and information sharing.

Legislation
Some people thought that current biosecurity legislation was ineffective, ad hoc and poorly co-ordinated. Suggestions to improve legislative aspects of biosecurity included:

  • Include a purpose statement and principles in the Biosecurity Act to guide decision makers.
  • Review the Biosecurity Act and the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act to enhance them and ensure compatibility in key areas.

Education and awareness
Most participants felt that the strategy should include future programmes for biosecurity education and awareness. Education and awareness are required at all levels. Some ideas suggested for achieving this included:

  • Educate politicians about the importance of biosecurity to ensure it is appropriately ‘ranked’ as a national good.
  • Improve inter-agency awareness of the broad scope of biosecurity activities.
  • Establish ‘targeted’ campaigns, particularly at importers and risk generators.
  • Run multi-media campaigns continually to reinforce key messages.
  • Include biosecurity in school curricula.

Accountabilities
Improving current communication and accountability pathways for biosecurity was seen by many as a mechanism for strengthening biosecurity in the future. Suggestions included:

  • Establish a ‘one stop shop’ biosecurity agency.
  • Improve co-ordination between central and regional biosecurity agencies.

6.2 Offshore biosecurity measures

A common theme emerging from many of the public meetings was the need for enhanced pre-border activities to move biosecurity risks offshore rather than deal with these risks on arrival. Some ideas included:

  • Have more pre-shipment inspections and offshore cargo clearances.
  • Target high-risk import pathways for special pre-export attention.
  • Prohibit known high-risk imports.
  • Require visiting vessels to undergo cleaning (e.g. hulls or fouled fishing nets) at the point of departure.

6.3 Biosecurity activities at the point of entry

Participants from all locations generated a number of ideas for improving future biosecurity activities at the ‘point of entry’ (i.e. at the border). Some common themes included:

  • Make treatment of all high-risk items (e.g. sea containers, passenger baggage) mandatory.
  • Develop new and innovative methods for the detection of unwanted organisms.
  • Increase inspection regimes at the border.
  • Implement systems for the mandatory identification of plant material that could be genetically modified.
  • Maintain a record of all biosecurity ‘law breakers’ and better target compliance activities against repeat offenders.
  • Define and establish ‘internal borders’ within New Zealand and implement internal quarantine and movement control programmes.

6.4 Surveillance for new pests

Surveillance was an area that many thought needed improvement. Suggestions included both national and regional surveillance programmes as follows:

  • Make the general public more aware of potential new pests to assist with early detection.
  • Target surveillance activities around high risk sites.
  • Improve regional surveillance activities.

6.5 Response to new incursions

Recent incursions (eg. painted apple moth, salt marsh mosquito) have highlighted the need for fast and effective response systems. Many people felt that current systems were ineffective. Some suggested improvements included:

  • Obtain better scientific knowledge of pests that could establish in New Zealand (e.g. from scientists in the country of origin).
  • Create an ‘Environmental Agency’ to audit regional pest management strategies.
  • Improve internal border control systems to manage the movement of unwanted pests into pest- free areas within New Zealand.
  • Establish an "incursion fund" to ensure adequate funding is immediately available to respond to new (national and regional) incursions.

7. Did the public meetings serve their intended purpose?

Feedback to the strategy team from participants was generally positive. People were supportive of the ‘workshop’ approach and appreciated being given the opportunity to contribute their ideas. The public meetings provided genuine opportunity for members of the public to contribute directly to the strategy development. The broad regional coverage also ensured that local biosecurity concerns, as well as national issues, were considered. Although numbers at the meetings varied, all attendees participated actively in the meetings and provided useful contributions to the strategy development process. The nature of the process used also ensured that maximum benefit was gained from an education and awareness perspective through presentations, active discussion and debate.

8. Where to from here?

The Biosecurity Strategy Development Team will use the results from the public meetings and other consultation activities to prepare the (draft) Biosecurity Strategy in early 2002. A second round of consultation will then follow the release of the draft strategy around May, June and July 2002.

Page last updated: 16 October 2008