Skip to content

Work to strengthen food recalls and risk-based plans and programmes


March 2020: New registration regulations in effect

Risk management programmes (RMPs) and wine standards management plans (WSMPs)

Hazard identification and management information

You are now required to provide hazard identification and management information (for example, aspects of a Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point plan) when registering the required parts of your programme (previously known as an outline).

When registering your RMP or WSMP with MPI, you can choose to submit either your entire programme or only certain parts of your RMP or WSMP.

The parts you must submit are outlined in regulations and can be found here: Animal Products (Risk Management Programme Registration - Required Part) Regulations 2020.

Wine (Wine Standards Management Plan Registration—Required Part) Regulations 2020 (LI 2020/11) Contents – New Zealand Legislation

These parts are referred to as the required parts of the RMP or WSMP.

The registration regulations will not impact the majority of existing wine businesses, as they are either registered using a Food Safety Template for Winemakers or an Industry Code of Practice template that includes hazard identification and management.

Significant amendments

Existing RMP or WSMP operators applying for a significant amendment now need to submit to MPI either the complete RMP or WSMP, or the required parts (now including hazard information), with the amendments highlighted. This change means that MPI will have access to either the full RMP or the required parts which will be more accessible and comprehensive than previously.

Animal Products Notice update

To support these changes for RMPs, the Animal Products Notice: Risk Management Programme Specifications Amendment and Requirements for Risk Management Programme Outlines Revocation 2020 was issued. This should be read in conjunction with the Animal Products (Risk Management Specifications) Notice 2008.

Relevant regulations and notices:

August 2019: Regulatory changes approved by Cabinet

On 18 September 2019, the Government agreed to proposals strengthening food traceability and recalls, and changes to risk-based plans and programmes. 

Summary of the proposals agreed to

Food recalls

  • All businesses with risk-based plans or programmes, and importers or exporters of food, are required to maintain food traceability and recall procedures
  • Businesses are required to keep accurate records that allow for the effective tracing and recall of food
  • Businesses are required to be able to trace food coming in, and food going out of their operations, and identify and locate food that is within their operations
  • MPI can request traceability information held by a food business be provided within a shortened timeframe
  • Mock recalls are to be performed around every 12 months, unless a successfully managed genuine recall has occurred in the previous 12 months.
  • Information supplied by food businesses in the event of a recall is to be in a format that is readily accessible

Risk management programmes

  • When providing the required parts of a risk management programme, hazard and identification and management information is required to be supplied to MPI
  • Similar requirements to those presently in the animal product notices for what needs to be in a risk management programme is to be moved into regulations and supplementary notice.

Relevant documents

December 2018: Consultation closed

Public consultation on proposals to strengthen food recalls and risk management programmes was held from 25 October 2018 to 7 December 2018. MPI received 35 submissions from a number of industry organisations, businesses, and individuals. MPI thanks all those who took the time to make submissions. 


What was consulted on?

Submissions were sought on proposals to strengthen food recalls and to improve risk-based plans and programmes. The proposals have their origins in the recommendations made from the independent government inquiry into the Whey Protein Concentrate Contamination Incident (WPC Incident).

Our aim was to find the most effective ways to improve food recalls and risk-based plans and programmes through implementing the lessons learned from the WPC incident. We also wanted to understand how the proposed changes could affect businesses and avoid unnecessary compliance burdens while finding effective ways to improve the food safety regulatory system.

Find out more in our media release

Summary of the food recall proposals

  1. Identifying who must maintain food recall processes: Make the current requirements explicit and ensure that all relevant businesses, including exporters of food, are covered.

  2. Clarifying what traceability procedures should cover and achieve: Businesses must keep accurate records of the foods and products they have brought or sold, and from whom or to whom they have bought or sold them (excluding sale to final consumer). These records must allow them to effectively trace and recall food products. Additional options are presented around tracing ingredients to final products and the tracing of packaging.
  3. Adjusting how long traceability records should be kept for: Same time as currently required, or 1 year past the shelf life of the food product, whichever is longer.
  4. Adjusting how quickly information must be shared during a food safety incident: Traceability information is to be provided to the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) within the time specified by a food safety officer, or within 24 hours, whichever is shorter.
  5. Requiring mock recalls to be held: Mock recalls are to be held each year unless a genuine recall has occurred over the past 12 months.
  6. Format of traceability information: Explicit requirement for information provided to MPI to be in a format that is easily usable.

Summary of the risk-based plans and programmes proposals

  1. Requiring hazard management information: Hazard analysis information will be required to be sent in when registering an outline of a risk management programme. This will align with the Food Act and the Wine Act.
  2. Differentiating food safety matters and related regulatory requirements from non-food safety matters: Operators will be required to differentiate their food safety legal requirements from their non-food safety material if they have incorporated both into their risk-based plan or programme. A number of options are presented as to how this may be achieved.
  3. Improving operator access to legal requirements: The main requirements for the contents of a risk management programme will be moved into one set of regulations (currently they are in a number of Notices).

Consultation documents

Submissions are public information

Any submission you make becomes public information. People can ask for copies of submissions under the Official Information Act 1982 (OIA). The OIA says we have to make submissions available unless we have a good reason for withholding it.  That is explained in sections 6 and 9 of the OIA.

Tell us if you think there are grounds to withhold specific information in your submission. Reasons might include that it's commercially sensitive or it's personal information. However, any decision MPI makes to withhold information can be reviewed by the Ombudsman, who may tell us to release it.

Contact us

If you want to find out more, email us at
You can also subscribe to our emailing list for updates here – follow the instructions and under ‘Email update topics’ select ‘Regulation Redesign’.

Work to redesign existing animal products and wine regulations

We are also working to redesign existing animal products and wine regulations to make them less complex, easier to understand and more accessible.

Redesign of animal products and wine regulations