Dear John, what's the story?

So, I will make it clear from the outset; I am sorry John. I do not understand. I read that you are tasked with the job, on behalf of the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI), to establish a 90 strong ‘On Farm Support Team’.

The picture comes immediately to mind of 90 white knights in full armour racing to the mercy of the poor beleaguered farmer – panting – ‘How can we help? How can we help?’

I can understand this initiative in respect to supporting those farmers affected by the consequences of Cyclone Gabrielle. But I struggle to find the reason to roll this out nationally. I just do not understand.

Perhaps it is pure Labour Party politics. This is election year so let’s demonstrate to farmers that we are on their side – we are here to help? If this is the case then, Dear John, I offer some personal advice: you have more to offer New Zealand agriculture than to become a pawn in some political game.

I am left wondering, what are the ’On Farm Support Team’ to do? It is a vexed question!

I think I understand that The Teams’ role will be to facilitate the reciprocal interchange of information between farmers, farm consultants, farming industries and the MPI. But nevertheless, the question begs – what will they do?

understand that they will not act as farm advisors and consultants but confusingly I am told that the “country is short of farm advisors and we are growing the workforce”. So, what will they do?

I am told that since the MAF Advisory Service was privatised in the 1980s, central government “lost its eyes and ears on the ground”. Still the question remains, what will The Team do? Rejuvenate the old MAF Farm Monitoring Scheme, work that is now being done, or at least I thought was being done, by Beef + Lamb and DairyNZ? He Waka Eke Noa like. Now there is a rub!

Are we really to believe that the current MPI will listen to what the “ears and eyes” are saying? Remember that MPI was given independent and indeed free science advice to the effect that Regenerative Agriculture (RA) was pseudo-science. The result? A $76m investment by MPI in RA. Good ears, good eyes! Listening?

I am told that the ‘On Farm Support Team’ will not be tasked with new and existing national MPI campaigns. That, I must say is a blessing. The thought that this 90-strong team will be out there promoting MPI’s current campaign promoting the pseudoscience of Regenerative Agriculture is a relief.

But let’s be generous for a moment and assume that The Team will find a useful productive niche in the market for their ‘services’. If this is achieved, won’t it be seen as a return, in part at least, to on-farm subsidies? I suspect farmers will not want to be tarnished with that brush again. So, I ask again, what will The Team do?

In any case, why can’t the currently ill-defined tasks proposed to be undertaken by The Team be entrusted to the existing mature networks of farm advisors and consultants, facilitated by the $55m investment directed towards the The Team? This it seems to me would be a win-win solution to the apparent shortage of farm advisors and consultants, remembering that this important component of the farming sector has largely struggled hand-to-mouth to survive in the post- Rogernomics world.

I am told that MPI will not poach privately employed farm advisors and that the majority of the new employees will be “new to this work”. God help us! It takes years of experience to develop the necessary rapport with farmers before they will take on board advice from a third party or have confidence in any advice being offered, even if it is just as simple as suggesting that a given farmer should seek help from soand- so.

It is suggested that “On Farm Support will have input into policy development and the ability to ground truth proposed regulations”. Really? From a team of people who are “new to this work”!

Forgive my cynicism, but this function, which was carried out by a team in MAF Policy, was disbanded in 2012! Many farmers who have slugged it out over the last 20 years or so, with little positive input from government, will be entitled to hold the view that The Team are no more than “pimps” for MPI.

Farmers, if I correctly sense their mood today, are wary of any new bureaucracy, they are tired of more rules and regulation, they are sick of being told what to do, they grimace at the need for more paperwork.

So, unless The Team can alleviate some of this burden, and pack down in the scrum behind farmers, they will be wasting their time and $55m of taxpayer’s money.

Doug Edmeades spent 20 years as a MAF soil scientist at Ruakura and in 1997 established his own science consulting business agKnowledge.