By ANNE BESTON
New Zealand's ability to police its borders for potentially disastrous disease and pest incursions has again come under fire.
The Government-appointed biosecurity council yesterday released its verdict on New Zealand's biosecurity, echoing the same concerns the Auditor-General raised in his report last month.
In putting together a biosecurity strategy,
the council found gaps in the system. It says Government agencies are not fully prepared for even a small outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease, potentially costing this country $4 billion.
That would reduce New Zealander's standard of living by 25 per cent.
The council's Guiding Pacific's Triple Star report says confusion and bickering between Government departments, lack of scientific knowledge about pest incursions and their potential impact and inconsistent checking of pest entry-points are hampering our ability to police our borders.
New Zealand could cope with "most small incursions of slow-moving organisms, but may not be able to handle large-scale outbreaks such as foot-and-mouth disease".
While risks were constantly changing "the capabilities to meet these new demands are stretched or missing".
Inconsistent funding decisions, erratic decision-making and lack of leadership put New Zealand at risk if a major biosecurity emergency occurred.
It questioned why MAF decided to screen all mail for plant and animal material but not courier packs and failed to review its fruit fly surveillance when a system had been put in that substantially reduced the likelihood of an incursion.
The council recommends the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry and the Ministry of Fisheries should take over biosecurity, effectively cutting the Department of Conservation and the Ministry of Health out.
DoC had been "frustrated" by the emphasis placed on protecting New Zealand's agricultural sector when it wanted more emphasis on protecting New Zealand's native species. It would still have an advisory role under the council's strategy.
The council recommends more spending on passenger clearances, cargo and container clearances and ships, saying surveillance is inconsistent.
The "marginal" benefits of screening 100 per cent of airline passengers wasn't weighed against increasing container inspection - at present just 23 per cent of containers are inspected for exotic pests.
Yet an analysis of 35 incursions over the past 15 years found the main entry points for exotic pests and diseases in order of priority were: ships and aircraft, imported containers and Machinery, smuggling, undetected material in legal imports and, lastly, incoming passengers.
The council recommends a range of advisory committees to provide advice to MAF and MFish if they are given sole responsibility for biosecurity.
A science advisory board was urgently needed because the research base for pest incursions was at times "totally inadequate".
New Zealand will spend about $500 million on biosecurity over the next year.
The Biosecurity Council's Triple Star strategy is open for public submissions until February 28.
MAF Biosecurity Authority
Herald feature: Environment
By ANNE BESTON
New Zealand's ability to police its borders for potentially disastrous disease and pest incursions has again come under fire.
The Government-appointed biosecurity council yesterday released its verdict on New Zealand's biosecurity, echoing the same concerns the Auditor-General raised in his report last month.
In putting together a biosecurity strategy,
AdvertisementAdvertise with NZME.