Question and answers about changing administration of the Mycoplasma bovis Eradication Programme

• Active Confirmed Properties – 0
• Cleared Confirmed Properties – 280
• Notices of direction (NOD) applied to properties – 2,668
• Tests completed – 3,285,705
• Compensation - total paid – $256.3m
• Compensation claims paid – 2,901

We are now in the tail-end of the outbreak. As at 2 August 2023, there are no properties with confirmed infection (compared to 40 confirmed properties at the height of the programme).

We identified a new strain in mid-2022. This strain does not appear to behave any differently than the strain we have been dealing with it and does not affect our efforts to eradicate M. bovis from New Zealand. The farm with this strain has been completely depopulated and all risk events followed up with no further infection detected.

The most probable pathway for this new incursion is bovine semen imported prior to the import health standard changing in May 2022. To mitigate the risk of another outbreak, MPI is testing bovine semen imported prior to this date which that has not been treated with a specific antibiotic protocol.

Due to the nature of the disease and its ability to remain clinically undetected, it is likely small numbers of additional cases could be found over the coming seasons. Several years of surveillance data needs to be collected to provide confidence that M. bovis is no longer present on New Zealand farms.

Several years of surveillance with no confirmed infection must occur to provide confidence that M. bovis is no longer present on New Zealand farms.

A National Pest Management Plan (national plan) is a regulatory tool under the Biosecurity Act designed to provide for the coordinated, long-term management and eradication of pests and diseases.

A national plan must name the pest or disease, describe the impact that it is having and how it is going to be managed, who is going to manage the pest, and how management of the pest will be funded.

A national plan also specifies the legal powers under the Biosecurity Act that the agency will be able to use to manage the pest/disease, and rules outlining specifications, prohibitions, and requirements that people must follow to support the success of the plan. Bovine TB eradication is also the subject of a national plan.

There are 3 existing national pest management plans in operation:

• American foulbrood of bees
• bovine tuberculosis (TB) of cattle
• Phytophthora agathidicida (PA) of kauri (kauri dieback).

The national plan to eradicate M. bovis is proposed to be in place for 4 to 10 years.

Our current evidence indicates the estimated 10-year programme (now in its sixth year) is on track for eradication with a target date set for June 2028. Programme surveillance will be needed for some years after to provide further assurance of eradication.

Leading up to June 2028, the Crown and industry will determine and agree on the continuation and funding of the programme beyond this date. This will occur whether the programme is administered under its current framework or a national plan.

The proposal is to decrease the levy rates for M. bovis Eradication Programme as follows:The proposal is to decrease the levy rates for M. bovis Eradication Programme as follows.

• For the dairy sector, the GIA levy rate would continue at 2.4 cents per kilogram of milksolids sold to a collection agent until 30 September 2024, then decrease to zero, and the National Pest Management Plan levy would be set at 1 cent from 1 October 2024, then is forecast to decrease to 0.5 cents from 1 October 2025 to 30 June 2028.
• For the beef sector, the GIA levy rate would continue at $1.80 per head of adult cattle slaughtered at commercial slaughter premises until 31 May 2025, then decrease (to a level to be determined to fund readiness and response costs other than M. bovis Eradication Programme costs), and the National Pest Management Plan levy would be set at 80 cents from 1 June 2025, then is forecast to decrease to 35 cents from 1 October 2026 to 30 June 2028.

Table: Projected levy rates to fund the dairy sector share of M. bovis Eradication Programme costs (per kilogram of milksolids sold to a collection agent)

*Note the dairy sectors GIA levy may also be used in the future to fund GIA response activities other than M. bovis Eradication Programme response costs

Table: Projected levy rates to fund the beef sector share of M. bovis Programme costs (per head of adult cattle slaughtered at commercial slaughter premises)

*Note the beef sectors GIA levy may also be used in the future to fund GIA readiness and response activities other than M. bovis Eradication Programme response costs.

As well as setting an 'actual rate'of levy and the date this commences, a maximum rate is also specified in the NPMP levy order which cannot be exceeded. The proposal is to set the 'maximum' and 'actual' rates of NPMP levy as follows.

For dairy: 

• a 'maximum rate' of 1 cent per kilogram of milksolids produced in New Zealand by a dairy farmer for supply to a dairy processor
• an 'actual rate' of 0.8 cents per kilogram of milksolids produced in New Zealand by a dairy farmer for supply to a dairy processor, to take effect from 1 January 2025 (Note this is then projected to reduce in later years as detailed below).

For beef:

• a 'maximum rate' of 80 cents per head for beef cattle slaughtered
• an 'actual rate' of 80 cents per head for beef cattle slaughtered, to take effect from 1 June 2025 (Note this is then projected to reduce in later years as detailed below).

Under the new financial projections for the M. bovis Eradication Programme from 2023/24, the industry share of M. bovis Eradication Programme costs will marginally exceed the existing fiscal caps set out in the OA.

The proposal is to increase dairy and beef sector fiscal caps in line with the new projected industry cost shares, as follows.

The proposed levy for farmers is set to reflect the funding each industry committed to pay for its share of eradication within the agreed estimated duration of the programme to achieve eradication.

The levy for beef cattle slaughtered will be paid to MPI – MPI is already set up to collect levies from meat processors, for example, TB – and then passed on to the management agency.

The levy that applies to milksolids is proposed to be collected by DairyNZ and be paid directly to the management agency.

While a new levy is required for a national plan, it is anticipated that the current GIA levy for M. bovis will significantly decrease.

The beef industry funds its share of the current programme costs using the Biosecurity Readiness and Response – Meat Levy. This levy exists under the GIA to allow Beef + Lamb New Zealand (B+LNZ) to fund commitments to biosecurity on behalf of sheep and beef producers. Once M. bovis migrates to a National Pest Management Plan, B+LNZ may need to retain this levy to fund any different future commitments on other pests and diseases that are required to protect the sheep and beef sector.

The dairy industry funds its share of the current programme using the Biosecurity Response Milksolids levy. This levy exists under the GIA to allow DairyNZ to fund commitments to biosecurity response on behalf of dairy farmers. Once M. bovis migrates to a national plan, the current GIA levy will be zero-rated and any surplus retained to fund any future commitments on other pests and diseases that are required to protect the dairy sector.

(For actual calculations, see also the response to the question "What are the M. bovis levy proposed rates and projections?")

It is proposed that compensation be provided under the national plan on broadly the same basis as it is under the current framework.

Under the status quo, compensation is provided in accordance with section 162A of the Biosecurity Act 1993. This requires compensation to be paid when powers under the Act are exercised for the purpose of eradicating or managing an organism, resulting in loss to a person.  

A difference is failure to comply with the national plan, including any of the rules, may impact compensation eligibility.

In practice, the management agency will approach compliance by seeking voluntary compliance first, assisting compliance where reasonable, then giving legal direction and reasonable opportunity to comply with such directions, and take enforcement action as a last resort. The management agency will also apply a 'reasonableness test' when taking any decision to deny compensation on the basis of failure to comply with the National Plan, and ultimately 'reasonableness' can be challenged through the courts.

Operational costs – provided in the current programme – will no longer be available, as processing of full compensation claims today are relatively fast to provide timely assistance.

All verifiable loss suffered as a direct result of activities carried out by the agency to manage M. bovis can be claimed through full compensation. Mustering costs are excluded.

No, MPI will continue to manage compensation associated with M. bovis.

This is to use existing systems and capability within MPI and avoid duplication of the compensation function (and associated cost) within the management agency.

Under a national plan, compensation payments will be made from national plan funding and will form part of the costs shared between the Crown and farmer levy payers. 

OSPRI will provide direction on where to seek assistance to those farmers that need support in preparing compensation claims

The rules have been developed to allow a non-government agency to administer an eradication programme with the necessary legal powers to enable delivery of an effective programme to progress with the gains achieved to date by the M. bovis Erdaication Programme.

There has been refinement of the rules to require compliance to ensure that surveillance programmes are representative of the national herd and provide increasing confidence that the objective is being met.

The rules provide clearer guidance of the specific requirements relating to M. bovis and direction where non-compliance could result in an offence.

Failure to comply with the rules potentially include an audit of non-compliances and biosecurity practices and reduced eligibility for compensation.

There are penalties for failure to comply with any rule under a national plan, where a breach of the rule is identified as an offence. This is the case under the proposed M. bovis National Pest Management Plan, the Tb National Pest Management Plan and all other national plans. The penalties are:

• in the case of an individual person, to a fine not exceeding $5,000
• in the case of a corporation, to a fine not exceeding $15,000.

Under the Biosecurity Act, compensation cannot be paid to a person that fails to comply with a national plan, including any rules.

These requirements will be equivalent to existing requirements under the Tb National Plan and will be described further in the agency’s national operating plan.

The purpose of this rule is to reduce the risk of wide infection that could arise if a high-risk enterprise becomes infected. This is to protect the vast majority of farmers that effectively manage M. bovis risk, and to reduce risk of compromising the eradication objective or extending the timeframe to achieve eradication (and the associated cost to farmers and taxpayers).

There would be no time-limit on deeming a property "high-risk" while the national plan is in force. The proposal is that an authorised person assesses whether a property is high-risk in accordance with criteria set out in the rule itself, and a property can be deemed to no longer be high-risk when the authorised person is satisfied this is the case (in accordance with the same criteria).

It is estimated that a very small number of properties will be classified as high-risk.

An authorised person representing the agency must consider the following criteria when determining whether a property is deemed a high-risk enterprise.

• The number of source properties.
• The number of source properties that are dairy farms.
• The current and likely future stocking density in respect to the enterprise and source properties.
• The frequency and nature of interactions between cattle located on the enterprise with cattle located on other properties.
• The number of destination properties.
• The potential for sustained high prevalence of infection.
• The PICA’s level of compliance with rule 1 of the plan – ‘Obligation to maintain cattle identification and traceability information’.

Detail for thresholds on the above criteria will be defined in the management agency’s National Operating Plan (NOP) for M. bovis.

The management agency will pay for the audit and any additional surveillance testing required under rule 15. Verifiable losses to any business stemming from the implementation of rule 15 will not be compensated. If expenses are incurred by the farmer/PICA to enable them to meet their obligations under these rules, the farmer/PICA is responsible.

An enterprise can be associated or connected to a high-risk property but have adequate measures in place to reduce risk of becoming infected and transmitting M. bovis, with level of risk assessed by the authorised person against the proposed criteria.  

The criteria are publicly available for consultation. If approved, farmers can make informed decisions whether they do business with a farm that meets the criteria. 

While ‘association or connection to high-risk properties’ is not one of the criteria, the authorised person would also be able to consider ‘other relevant information including but not limited to non-compliance with national plan rules, links to current or formerly infected properties and patterns of aggregation or dispersal of stock or disposal of milk that present, in the opinion of the authorised person, an elevated level of risk’.

OSPRI has an established rural network across the country. OSPRI’s head office is based in Wellington and has regional offices in Palmerston North, Hamilton, Christchurch, and Dunedin. Team members are also based in Whangarei, Stratford, Taupo, Napier, Greymouth, Timaru, Mackenzie, and Invercargill.

While a national (or regional) pest management plan provides tools to eradicate the disease, the management agency is required to prepare a national operating plan (NOP) which sets out how the management agency actually delivers the work needed to achieve the goal of eradication.

The management agency must prepare a NOP within 3 months of a national plan coming into effect. It must be reviewed by the management agency annually, with a report on performance provided to the minister.

Progress towards the plan’s objectives is to be measured by monitoring and recording the following.

• The number of confirmed properties and whether this is decreasing.
• How rapidly risk events are identified, and investigations launched, where required.
• The level of surveillance and associated confidence in freedom from M. bovis.
• The level of compliance with the rules in the plan.
• The level of awareness of M. bovis and reporting obligations by those subject to the plan.
• The completeness and accuracy of tracing data and the ability to expediently trace risk events and animals.
• The time that farms are under active management of the management agency.
• The time taken to process compensation claims.

The agency’s national operating plan will set out in detail how these measures are to be monitored and recorded and frequency of reporting.

In accordance with the Biosecurity Act, the operational plan will be reviewed annually, submitted to the Minister for Biosecurity and made publicly available on the agency’s website.

A national plan will not affect the wide range of available farmer support services provided by industry. More information on farmer support is on the M. bovis website (www.mbovis.govt.nz) .

A significant share of New Zealand’s cattle production is sourced from Māori-owned land and businesses.

The proposal is future focused and upholds a kaupapa that strongly supports principles of kaitiakitanga and whanaungatanga. The programme objective is to protect our national herd for future generations and strengthen the wider biosecurity system. The outcome is equitable for all New Zealanders and all groups (whether defined socially, economically, demographically or geographically) including Māori farmers and landowners.

The risk of adverse effects to Māori interests is very low. Cleaning and disinfection of infected properties is a potential risk to taonga as it could create effluent run-off into streams. Typically, the risk is very low as effluent on the milking platform is hosed down and captured according to strict programme standards and regulations under other legislation (such as the Resource Management Act and the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act). Under the proposed draft national plan, the programme will continue a strict risk management approach for cleaning and disinfection.

Many marae and papakāinga across the country raise animals including cattle to provide food for whānau and hapū living on land blocks, and important gatherings such as tangihanga, poukai, hui and wānanga. Providing sufficient amount of kai at these gatherings is an active practice of manaakitanga which is a key value te ao Māori that maintains balance via reciprocity. The ability to exercise manaakitanga and rangatiratanga is inextricably connected to (and affects) Māori values including hauora and mauri. The culling of cattle will not impact on customary food production. In the short-term term, meat can be consumed and stored in the freezer. Other sources of meat are also likely to be available, for example, lamb, pork, and chicken. Compensation for culled animals is also provided. Cattle can be replaced after the property has gone through cleaning and disinfection and a mandatory stand down period.

The eradication effort is entering a phase where we expect to find fewer cases of infection. Where infection is found, the programme works closely with each impacted farmer to develop a bespoke plan to minimise disruption and impacts to ancestral lands, waters, sites, wāhi tapu, and taonga.

M. bovis is present world-wide in countries where cattle are farmed. Because it is so widespread, it is not considered a disease of relevance to trade by the World Organisation for Animal Health. There are no regulatory restrictions in New Zealand for meat and dairy products due to M. bovis, and there are no food safety implications.

New Zealand has a reputation for being a country free of many diseases, having high standards for animal welfare and producing primary products that are safe for consumers. The eradication of M. bovis from New Zealand supports this reputation as a producer of disease-free, ethical and safe primary products, and would have positive impacts on the marketing of New Zealand dairy and beef products overseas.

Successful eradication of M. bovis from New Zealand signals to overseas markets and trading partners that biosecurity and protecting the way we farm in New Zealand is important to us.

M. bovis infection itself has no direct impact on human health. However, the response to M. bovis can be stressful for farmers who enter the programme.

We’ve made improvements to the way farmer support is provided, which includes implementing farmer-facing roles, biosecurity enhancements, improvements to compensation processes, introducing farmer welfare support roles and improving engagement and communications.

These measures are all proposed to continue under the plan, noting also that very few, if any, farms are expected to be placed under movement controls or be depopulated once the delimiting phase is completed and the plan commences.

Implementing the plan has no potential effects on enjoyment of the natural environment. Potential effects that implementation of the plan could have on the environment are in relation to water as cleaning and disinfection could create effluent run-off into streams. This is typically a very low risk as effluent on the milking platform is hosed down and generally captured.

The potential impact on the environment is assessed for each situation requiring cleaning and disinfection and mitigation procedures are required to be met by contractors completing work. Compliance with these procedures is monitored by the programme (monitoring is proposed to continue under a national plan).

Environmental risks from the use of cleaning and disinfection substances are also mitigated through compliance with product use and discharge controls under other legislation (such as the Resource Management Act 1991 and the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act 1996). 

M. bovis is an economically significant pathogen of cattle throughout the world as it imposes a cost on production and can significantly compromise the welfare of clinically diseased animals. It can cause pneumonia, arthritis, and mastitis in adult cattle, and middle ear infections, conjunctivitis, pneumonia, and arthritis in calves. In addition to these immediately apparent clinical impacts, infection increases susceptibility to other diseases. Disease is typically chronic and responds poorly to treatment with antibiotics. It can spread readily among intensively managed cattle. There are no effective vaccines currently available to prevent infection or control its spread.

Implementation of the plan is likely to have overall positive long-term effects on the economic wellbeing of New Zealand cattle farmers, and supporting services in rural communities, and New Zealanders generally as the proposed plan aims to reduce and ultimately eradicate M. bovis from New Zealand.

In 2018, it was forecast that, if allowed to establish, M. bovis would cost the industry $606 million (50% confidence) to $1.153 billion over 10 years (90% confidence) through losses in production if no further action was taken. This was based on an estimated 0.7% drop in average production across the industry.

The New Zealand Institute of Economic Research (NZIER) also estimated that unchecked spread of M. bovis could result in 0.08% decrease in Gross Domestic Product and a 0.24% reduction in farmland prices.

Successful eradication of M. bovis from New Zealand would help maintain animal productivity and animal welfare that are adversely affected by M. bovis. The adverse effects of M. bovis are further described in section 6 of the full proposal document.

Financial impacts on farmers directly impacted by the programme will continue to be mitigated through the provision of compensation payments, as set out in section 27 of the full proposal.

All feedback will be analysed and considered by the M. bovis Eradication Programme partners MPI, Beef + Lamb New Zealand, and DairyNZ. The draft proposal for the national plan will be updated as appropriate.

All feedback, including the analysis and how this has been considered will be published and it is expected the final proposal will be submitted to the Minister for Biosecurity in late 2023 for review.

If satisfied with the proposal, the minister may then approve the preparation of the national plan consistent with the proposal. Once satisfied that the new plan meets the requirements of the Biosecurity Act, the minister would need to seek Cabinet approval for the national plan to take effect.