Feds never was anti-NAIT

For the record, Federated Farmers was never against a NAIT concept. However, it was then – and still should be – Feds’ job to interrogate the integrity of any concept pushed by the regulator, let alone those promoted by the levy bodies involved and technology salesmen.

Many claims were made about the benefits of a new tracing system. Primary amongst these claims was that New Zealand needed a nationwide electronic animal identification system to retain or obtain access to the international marketplace.  

That seemed plausible. So, about 2008, seeking confirmation that was fact, I wrote to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MFaT) and asked where in the world this was such a requirement? “Nowhere”, came their written formal official response.  Is it still so today? Well I don’t know, but no doubt someone will say it isn’t. 

Secondly, the question was asked: why weren’t all cloven-hoof animals in the scheme if biosecurity rigour was the requirement? To omit any was illogical to Feds at the time. My guess is that it won’t be for much longer, while the regulator has producers over a barrel about NAIT frailties becoming so obvious.

Thirdly, we debated the technology being touted. We wanted it right, fit for purpose, with better retention than observed in flock and herds using tags to that point. We sought advice and – from memory – I recall something about high frequency systems being better than the chosen low frequency type and that micro-chipping retention was better than tags for long term animal ID.

All our input was dismissed by the regulator who, after being lobbied hard by major tag and technology providers, chose low frequency ear tags.   Of course, none of this made transport companies or stock agents jump at a potential new revenue stream that regulations normally give rise to. All they saw was cost and effort and a system that would fail.

Lastly, and perhaps only obvious to those close, the Feds’ meat and fibre chairs of the time caved in to the noise around them rather than standing strong. Their job was – and still is – to maintain authority over the property of members. They failed.  

What’s the upshot? We have a failing system because real farmers – who would have to apply effort and comply – were not listened to. It’s that simple.

If anyone had bothered to listen to the real and responsible questions at the outset, the mess surrounding the tracing of animals after the onset of Mycoplasma Bovis might have been avoided. 

From the beginning Feds wanted better. But as so often happens it was beaten down by political favour and self-interest. I hope the current NAIT review covers these massive gaps. The saying ‘you reap what you sow’ now seems apt. 

• Don Nicolson was a Federated Farmers NZ board member from 2003-11 and national president from 2008-2011.