M bovis governance group chair Kelvan Smith says the review recommendations will not be left on the shelf to gather dust.
Recommendations reflecting the lessons learnt from the Mycoplasma bovis programme will not be left gathering dust on a shelf.
An independent review of the programme identified key lessons for future management of large-scale and complex animal disease incursions.
“The report is not going to gather dust, we want to make sure there is follow-up on the recommendations,” M bovis governance group chair Kelvan Smith said.
The Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) M bovis Governance Group commissioned the review in February this year, appointing Nicola Shadbolt (chair), Roger Paskin, Caroline Saunders and Tony Cleland to carry it out.
The governance group comprises government and industry representatives.
The review had three clear goals, including to reduce the impact of the disease and the eradication programme for everyone affected and to leave New Zealand’s biosecurity system stronger.
Key recommendations released in the review report include building a national contingency plan for future animal disease responses, supported by detailed operational procedures and materials.
This includes developing standing governance of livestock disease preparedness made up of MPI and industry organisations and developing and resourcing the livestock disease preparedness structure, capacity and capability within MPI.
Developing and resourcing a data strategy across the livestock biosecurity system is recommended to improve NZ’s wider biosecurity system.
Shadbolt says the panel considered the evolution of the M bovis programme from its start in 2017 to today.
“Our review was informed by the experiences of both farmers and those who worked in the programme,” Shadbolt said.
She acknowledges the report is “very critical in a number of areas”.
“There is a lot of constructive criticism, it wasn’t a pat on the back,” she said.
“Yes, to the farmers, we absolutely got the dramas and inadequacies, the report didn’t whitewash that, it brought that all out.”
She says while understanding farmers’ angst, the review panel looked for the what next.
“We used the report to look forward to ensure we never go there again and how we can collectively build a strong biosecurity system for the future,” she said.
The report identified key to implementing the recommendations is for the governance group to prioritise, support, communicate and monitor the implementation of the recommendations with other industries and partners.
Smith says the focus for the recommendations is aimed at preparing the livestock sector to deal with future biosecurity incursions.
The recommendations affect farm operators, livestock industry board rooms, the wider animal farming sector and MPI.
Several of the recommendations encompass findings discussed in multiple chapters; they have not been separated into chapter-specific segments but kept as a holistic overview of the proposed systemic improvements.
Smith acknowledges concern has been aired as to what happens now.
He assures farmers the recommendations will be actioned.
“The governance group commissioned the review and the report makes it clear we have a role to implement the recommendations,” Smith said.
“I can assure farmers we (M bovis Governance Group) are responsible to oversee the process to action the recommendations and work is already underway to do that.”
A working group of representatives from MPI, Beef + Lamb NZ and DairyNZ has been formed to establish a joint government and industry agreed work programme to deliver the recommendations.
The working group is chaired by MPI chief biosecurity officer Stu Hutchings.
“The governance group is monitoring the progress of the working group and there is a bunch of work already under way,” he said.
The governance group effectively has two more years in existence.
“We are here until the last (infected) farm is found, at which time long-term surveillance kicks in and the programme transitions to another group,” he said.
Smith could not divulge details of that group at this stage.
In the meantime, he says the focus is on looking forward to a stronger NZ biosecurity system to ensure better systems and support in the future for disease responses.
