Speech to NZ Institute of Agricultural and Horticultural Science Biosecurity Forum

Thank you to the Institute of Agricultural & Horticultural Science for putting together this conference on what is a very important topic, and for inviting me to say a few words.

Before I start I’d like to comment on the title of this conference - Have we gone soft at the border?

I was advised that it would be a ‘courageous’ move to speak at a conference with such a title. But given the importance to me of biosecurity, I saw this event as more of an opportunity than a challenge.

I do want to challenge the title for two reasons. Firstly, I believe it takes too simplistic an approach to addressing how effective our biosecurity system is.

A world class biosecurity system is not about how many people are standing guard at our borders. It takes effect across a number of stages from pre-border to at-border to post-border.

All of these facets of the system need to be strong and need to be regularly reviewed for improvements.

The second reason is that I look out into this room and see some of the best experts in this field, like Dr Stephen Goldson who has been a big contributor on my Biosecurity Ministerial Advisory Committee. It is not too often you get a chance like this. I see great potential for this room to constructively advise me on How we can improve our Biosecurity System.

New Zealand is a trading nation. We live off our exports, but equally we are dependent on a range of imports.

We are also a nation that relies heavily on primary sector exports. These make up 72% of New Zealand’s overall merchandise exports.

Part of the success of our exports is down to New Zealand’s international reputation. And a key part of that reputation is our strong biosecurity system and our relatively pest-free status.

The challenge for me, and for you here today, is how we continue to facilitate and grow trade, yet continue to protect New Zealand from unwanted pests.

It can’t be a choice between these two goals. We have to do both.

The main point I want to make today is that there will always be risk of an unwanted pest being introduced to New Zealand. It is simply impossible to eliminate all risk.

Even if we completely stopped all trade to and from New Zealand, even if we halted all movement of people in and out of New Zealand – something I’m sure no one in this room wants - we would still not completely eliminate all risk.

So the question is how we best manage this risk.

To illustrate our challenge let me provide some context - around 175,000 items come across our border each day, and we receive around 10 million travellers a year.

It is simply not possible, for example, to do an exhaustive search of every item in every container in every consignment that arrives in New Zealand.

So what we need to do, and what MPI do, is to work smartly to manage risk at every level of the biosecurity system and to provide the best level of protection.

I have made it clear to MPI that biosecurity is my number one priority. I expect a high level of attention to be paid at every aspect of the system, and MPI is dedicated to making sure that New Zealand continues to have a world class biosecurity system.

I would like to spend the rest of this speech providing an over view of what we are doing to improve our biosecurity system.

Firstly though, I want to clarify an important misconception that some people have raised around this year’s Budget.

To make it crystal clear: funding has not been cut for biosecurity.

Appropriations for ‘border biosecurity monitoring and clearance’ were temporarily higher in last year’s Budget due to funding being brought forward from 2011/12 to pay for, among other things, the Joint Border Management System.

There is from time to time noise from certain political parties that numbers of MPI staff at the border have been slashed. This is of course simply political spin.

The total number of staff has decreased since 2008, but the decrease of staff over the last five years has averaged in the order of 1.9% per annum.

The largest factor in this reduction was the global financial crisis, which significantly reduced trade flows. The Biosecurity system is a responsive system. When less products and people come across the border, less people are needed to check them.

MPI are in the process, as trade increases again, of bolstering their staff. That is why late last year we recruited 45 quarantine inspectors. In January we recruited another 11, and we are in the process of recruiting another 30 quarantine inspectors.

MPI’s biosecurity detector dog programme has also expanded its operational capacity, with 34 teams now active nationally.

I would also like to comment on the direct exit or green lane initiative which comes under political attack from time to time.

Let me be clear, every international passenger who comes through our airports undergoes a form of biosecurity screening. What this initiative does is it allows MPI staff to focus their resources on the high risk passengers, rather than the low risk passengers.

What those critics who hark back to the days of 100% screening don’t realise is that in 2007, with 100% screening, surveys picked up non-compliance in the order of 2%. With Direct Exit in place those same surveys are showing compliance that is as good as when we had 100% screening.

MPI and I are always looking to make improvements to our biosecurity system.

That is why today I have announced that MPI are trialling a pioneering X-ray image transfer process with Melbourne Airport that will enable the biosecurity screening of luggage before it arrives here.

Any bag containing biosecurity risk items can now be matched with the passenger, who will face further scrutiny by officials upon landing.

In the longer term, X-ray image transfer could be applied to routes with higher biosecurity risk, such as those from South East Asia, parts of Europe and the Pacific.

New Zealand is leading the game here. A number of countries, airport companies and airlines are watching the trials of this technology closely. The system could provide another powerful tool for MPI to protect New Zealand from dangerous pests and diseases.

It is pleasing to note that at the recent Auckland Airport Company Awards MPI won the Service Provider Award for improving customer experience and service.

Enhancing our ability to manage outbreaks of significant animal disease, in particular foot and mouth disease (FMD), also remains a high priority.

Earlier this year a report by the Auditor General identified some areas of improvement.

MPI has fully accepted the OAG recommendations, noting that some of them, such as regular simulations and exercises, had already been implemented.

At the same time, the report acknowledged that MPI and its predecessor organisations had been largely successful at dealing with incursions.

MPI is now making improvements through a fresh programme of work.

Exercise ‘Taurus’ in March 2012 is an example of this. The exercise tested a whole-of-Government response to an FMD outbreak.

Recently operation ‘Capricorn’ was held, in which MPI worked closely with our animal industries in a simulation of day one of an FMD outbreak.

Senior officials also travelled to Britain last month to take part in a simulated outbreak of swine fever. 

In May this year Australia and New Zealand began work on a new trans-Tasman action plan to improve our preparedness for FMD. This will involve:

• Sharing intelligence on emerging animal health risks facing our region
• Developing and improving training activities
• Collaborating on policy development and operational plans.

Good progress is also being made on the Government Industry Agreement on Biosecurity Readiness and Response (GIA). The GIA will provide an opportunity for industries to identify the biosecurity risks of greatest concern to them, and jointly invest with government to better manage those risks, across the biosecurity system.

I want to finish by reaffirming this Government’s full commitment to both protecting and growing New Zealand. It is in the direct interest of all New Zealanders to ensure that the primary sector remains the backbone of our economy.

I look forward to hearing the thoughts and ideas coming out of today’s conference. I would like to point out that MPI have a number of staff here, I encourage you all to use their time while you have them with you.

Working together, government and industry can and will do more.

Thank you.