From big corporates to the little processors we’re hearing them informing us that the consumers want, foods that are produced with a focus on various issues such as; animal welfare, human rights, plastic use, carbon emissions, water use, protecting nature, food waste, recycling, health and safety and overall sustainable sourcing.

Whilst these goals that the corporations and processors are telling us are required are wonderful in terms of the protection of our environment, when I go to the supermarket I see shoppers buying products that are able to meet there price range.

A very large percentage of them aren’t looking up the packaging codes to see whether the foods are produced with a focus on animal welfare, human rights, plastic use, carbon emissions, water use, protecting nature, food waste, recycling, health and safety and sustainable sourcing.

The majority of shoppers just want good food items that are affordable that meet their budgets that can provide them with three feeds a day.

The producers of these foods need to comply with government regulations in regard to providing safe food for sale and protection of the environment during production whilst still trying to make a profit, yet they are mostly in the same situation as the consumer in having difficulty in balancing their budgets and covering their costs.

The government ministries have employed more bureaucrats and bureaucracy to meet the concerns of what they deem to be the most important issues currently faced such as safety and environmental compliance in the production of those food products.

These issues are often raised by a very vocal minority who believe they know best for all of us, and the government bureaucrats who in many cases have never had any actual practical experience in producing these products tend to be persuaded by the person who screams the loudest or follow their own beliefs.

The silent majority who are in many cases just too busy trying to make enough income to survive, to allow them the time to put forward opposing viewpoints are then left to deal with the outcomes of those bureaucrats decisions, for better or worse.

What we need from our elected officials is the knowledge to ask the questions that are required to make sure the right policies are applied if there are any detrimental issues from our production methods.

When reading through many of the current government’s policies that are being put in place there often doesn’t seem to be any good reason for the policy changes that are being implemented. Because there is always a consequence to any plan or policy, all we ask for is that the bureaucrats understand the consequences of any policy changes, and if it has more downsides then it shouldn’t go through.

Often a plan or policy gets implemented and supersedes another but the other plan/policy is not rescinded and dumped into waste basket and this just adds more cost onto both the producers and the end users.

A classic example of this situation is the current legislative rule changes being introduced onto the agricultural production sectors which are being justified by claims of commitments under the “Paris Accord” on climate change.

This accord specifically states under article 2b that policies made under the accord should be implemented only in a manner that does not threaten food production, yet we see many policy changes being implemented that are having a large detrimental effect our agricultural production sector.

The changes that are being imposed on the agricultural sectors do not seem to take into account the fact that New Zealand agricultural producers are some of the best in the world as evidenced by the comments from Gavin Hodgson, the director of agriculture, horticulture and aquaculture at Sainsbury’s the United Kingdom supermarket chain, below:

New Zealand livestock farmers are well ahead of what is needed to meet the environmental and social needs of consumers, a Sainsbury’s executive said.

“You are leading the way,” Gavin Hodgson, the director of agriculture, horticulture and aquaculture at the United Kingdom supermarket chain, told 700 farmers attending the Silver Fern Farms (SFF) Plate to Pasture Farmer Conference in Christchurch.

He said he had noticed a substantial difference, since his last visit in 2019, in the approach of farmers to meeting these standards.

“As a country you are years ahead and SFF is also well ahead and that is an important message.”

Sainsbury’s accounts for 15% of UK supermarket sales and Hodgson said NZ farmers are aligned to the retailer’s sustainability values, which are enshrined in its Plan for Better strategy.

That strategy sets out three goals: providing a product that is better for the individual, better for the planet and better for everyone.

Each goal comes with specific targets that address diets, reducing carbon emissions and food waste, less packaging, more recycling and protecting and regenerating nature.

They also include human rights, community and partnerships, working conditions and animal health and welfare.

Recent research has confirmed the carbon footprint of New Zealand beef and lamb is amongst the lowest in the world. The study was commissioned by Beef + Lamb New Zealand (B+LNZ) and Meat Industry Association (MIA).

The comprehensive study by AgResearch found that a kilo of New Zealand sheep meat has a carbon footprint of just under 15 kilograms (kgs) of CO2 equivalent emissions per kilo.

Meanwhile, the carbon footprint of New Zealand beef is just under 22kgs – making the country’s red meat among the most efficient in the world.

The researchers, which compared New Zealand’s on-farm emissions to a range of countries’ footprints across the globe, concluded that when Kiwi beef or sheep meat is exported, the total carbon footprint is lower or very similar to domestically-produced red meat in those nations.

They concluded that this is because New Zealand is so efficient at the farm level, which represents about 90-95 per cent of the total carbon footprint.

The research “proved beyond doubt” that New Zealand beef and sheep meat had one of the lightest carbon footprints for red meat in the world.

Although the research showed Kiwi sheep and beef farmers were among the most efficient in the world, continuous improvement was still required. It shows that sheep and beef farmers have done a great job over the last 20-30 years, but we arguably still need to do more.

New Zealand’s farmers remain committed to making a contribution to achieving scientifically-justified emissions targets in order to keep a lid on global temperature rises, but this needs to be fair, based on science and reflect reality.

The UNFCCC declared in October 2022 that their predictions around climate change were in fact wrong and that they were reducing their predicted climate warming numbers by 50%.

So we have a government that is pushing their policies on climate change to the extent that they will turn our economy on its head, force energy prices through the roof, damage businesses, affect employment, destroy the viability of a large percentage of our agricultural industry, accelerate inflation and severely threaten our security of food supply, all based on predictions that are now said by the UN, to have been overstated by at least 50%.

How much must the taxpayers of New Zealand suffer before this government wakes up to the stupidity of their ideological attachment to the policies that are plainly wrong?

© Scoop Media