FAQs related to Draft IHS for Specified Processed Bee Products
Submissions and MAF responses will be collated in a 'Review of Submissions' document. This document will be forwarded to all submitters.
MAF encourages respondents to forward comments electronically.
Please include the following information in your submission:
- Your name and title, postal address, telephone and fax numbers.
- Your organisation, if applicable.
Please note that your submission is public information. Submissions may be the subject of requests for information under the Official Information Act 1982 (OIA). The OIA specifies that information is to be made available to requesters unless there are sufficient grounds for withholding it, as set out in the OIA. Submitters may wish to indicate grounds for withholding specific information contained in their submission, such as when the information is commercially sensitive or if they wish personal information to be withheld. Any decision to withhold information requested under the OIA is reviewable by the Ombudsman.
Generally documents are made available for consultation for 30 working days after which they are finalised following consideration of submissions made during that time. Once finalised, they are posted to other relevant areas in this website with the review of submissions.
Submitters who supply commercially sensitive information need to clearly identify it as such, so that it can be handled securely and not released to the public.
The Government (represented by MAF) and primary production organisations with sufficient mandate to make decisions and commit resources on behalf of that industry.
Joint decision-making and resourcing could be formalised through an agreement (a contract, memorandum of understanding (MoU), or some combination of the two) between Government and primary industries. The agreements would cover readiness and responses for pests and diseases that directly impact on those industries.
It is not possible to predict what future incursions may occur, and the scale, duration, and resulting costs of future incursion responses. However, Appendix 11 of the discussion paper gives examples of the costs of past incursion responses that MAF has undertaken. Surveillance and contingency planning activities generally are less costly than responding to an incursion. Investing well in these activities would decrease the risk of a costly incursion response needing to be undertaken.
The public discussion paper is available at:
MAF Biosecurity New Zealand’s draft response policy is available at: