Al en + Clarke
Agricultural Emissions Pricing Consultation – The Ministry for the Environment and the Ministry for Primary Industries
Consultation Event Feedback Template
Instructions:
• One template is to be fil ed in per consultation event and provided to Al en + Clarke following each consultation event for
inclusion in the overall analysis. In the first instance, the primary audience is Al en + Clarke, who wil focus thematic feedback,
but these wil also serve as our primary record/notes for each session.
• Use the prompts provided as suggestions to capture as much information as possible. However, you do not have to answer
every prompt, and can vary from the specific question if this wil better capture the themes and information provided in the
session.
• Capture as many Q&As as possible in the designated row, and duplicate the row for each new question. If you know that the
question has already come up and been answered similarly, or exists in our FAQs, you can make a call on either not capturing
it or referencing the relevant FAQ.
• Please file here, or email to 9(2)(g)(ii)
if you cannot access the link.
Date:
31 October 20222
Meeting type:
Ag Emissions Pricing Consultation: Ag Sector famers & growers group (nationwide) #3
MfE/MPI staff:
MPI: Darran Austin, Shannon Bentley, Claudia Gonnelli,
MfE: Jessica Bensemann, Hannah Steans, Emma Tauti, Cephas Samwini
Facilitators: Dinah Vincent, Glen Lauder
Number of attendees:
101 at peak
1
Al en + Clarke
Agricultural Emissions Pricing Consultation – The Ministry for the Environment and the Ministry for Primary Industries
Date:
31 October 20222
Demographic of attendees (if
Farmers and growers
possible, e.g. farmer, NGO, Māori,
general public):
Prompt
Stakeholder feedback
Emissions reporting
Why is collective reporting only being included for Maori from 2025? Why is there no fixed
date to enable collective reporting for all farms?
Who did attendees think should be
How will emissions be priced for those who only trade animals if they do not process it. Stock
responsible for
reporting and paying
reconciliation in the farm level, for the processor levy will only be those who send them to the
for
emissions?
works
What feedback did attendees have on
the
thresholds set for farms to report Why has the minimum for fertiliser application been set at 40 tonnes? Roughly the
emissions?
same number of emissions as the other thresholds established. (HWEN).
What did attendees believe would need Would the inclusion of catchment groups reporting col aboratively be considered? Could this
to be in place to
include collectives in be done in conjunction with Farm Environmental Plans at the catchment level? Grant scheme
the pricing scheme?
and contract for sequestration, so catchment groups could do it, run a sequestration project at
a larger scale (catchment scale).
2
Al en + Clarke
Agricultural Emissions Pricing Consultation – The Ministry for the Environment and the Ministry for Primary Industries
Did attendees believe farms will have
the
necessary data for reporting by
2025?
What feedback did attendees have on
Why was January 1st chosen as the reporting date? To align with existing tax system.
registration requirements?
Did attendees raise any concerns
about
reporting and payment timing?
Did attendees believe there are any
opportunities to improve the proposed
approach to
reporting emissions?
New/thorny questions asked by
Wil some of the processors be expected to contribute to transition support, given some of
attendees
their profit margins?
[Duplicate this row as needed]
Nothing included at the moment, but they could definitely contributing, there is definitely a
role for them.
Wil NZ take into account organic carbon stored in soil as Europe is considering? Soil carbon is
highly variable, easily lost, and we are working on the science behind it.
Pricing, revenue and incentive payments
What
concerns did attendees have
around the proposed approach to
Could you explain how the weighted annual average is calculated? HEWN recommendation, to
setting levy prices?
avoid a month-by-month updates.
3
Al en + Clarke
Agricultural Emissions Pricing Consultation – The Ministry for the Environment and the Ministry for Primary Industries
Did attendees offer any
improvements If long-lived gases weren't linked to the NZ ETS price, would they be handled similarly to how
to the proposed approach to
setting
the methane price is proposed to be set? Or would it be a different method?
levy prices?
Why doesn't the pricing system recognise early adopters? We want to make sure we do so with
incentive payments
Can someone expand on the process of setting the "unique" methane levy price? How is it
"based on progress towards methane targets" and fol owing consultation with the agriculture
sector? There is stil a bit of work on how it wil work, we are recognising a range of other
factors as wel as the achievement of the target, which is the primary considerations.
Is there a chance that the advisory board wil become political when appointed only by
ministers rather than by the ministers and He Waka Eke Noa Jointly as proposed by the
Partnership?
What feedback did attendees have on
the proposed
revenue recycling
strategy?
What did attendees think about an
advisory board for revenue
recycling?
What
transitional support did
Q: What assumptions were made in the economic modelling? Are potential mitigations
attendees say was needed?
included?
What approaches did attendees support Q: is anything being done to close the gap between mitigation opportunities between dairy
for
incentivising mitigation practices and the red meat sector? There is new funding for science for the Agriculture centre,
or technologies?
opportunity to have levy proceeds to be recycled into R&D and to close the gap. Same for
deer industry and specific regions.
4
Al en + Clarke
Agricultural Emissions Pricing Consultation – The Ministry for the Environment and the Ministry for Primary Industries
What
mitigation practices or
Q:Given the very real socio-economic impacts on Maori, rural communities etc has
technologies did attendees think
there been a report that assesses the impacts of this policy on national wel being?
should be
supported by an incentive
payment?
A: We are stil in the policy development, but we have not completed the Impact
assessment as we do not know what the price wil be and what the system. For
this initial assessment, we are seeing how we can less impact these sectors, but
more work wil be done when more details are about to be legislated.
There are clearly no mitigations for low intensity hil country beef farms (breeding and store),
nor are there likely to be in the near future that are cost effective or practical from what I can
see. What help is there for us or is the aim to have us leave the industry and sel the farm for
forestry, thus reducing stock numbers thus reducing emissions?
New/thorny questions asked by
attendees
Question: If a farming system achieves the 10% reduction by 2030 will the levy be
discontinued? If not, what would be the purpose of continuing the levy?
[Duplicate this row as needed]
Why is Fonterra, delivering a $583m net profit last year, not made to bear some of
the transitional support for farmers?
On our farm since 1990, we were 2700SU and today we are 2100SU so not only
have we not contributed to warming, we've contributed to global cooling since that
time. Why are you demanding we contribute further methane reductions? When
wil it be enough?
Pricing carbon sequestration and nitrogen fertiliser
5
Al en + Clarke
Agricultural Emissions Pricing Consultation – The Ministry for the Environment and the Ministry for Primary Industries
What feedback did attendees have on
How are Vegetable Growers expected to reduce their fertiliser emissions? We are
the proposed approach to
carbon
sequestration?
already using the bare minimum. Fert prices have increased 100 % over the last
12 months.
What
barriers did attendees raise to
Two approach, coated urea capsule, not use if appropriate, incorporating fertiliser
including new categories of
sequestration in the NZ ETS
beneath the soil, but not sure how they are helpful for growers.
?
Did attendees have any
concerns
You mentioned stock exclusion as a method that would be recognised, what about pest
about bringing
on-farm vegetation into control as this has a significant effect on growth. Considering, particularly if you have deer. We
a farm-pricing system?
need more info and feedback.
Did attendees prefer
pricing nitrogen
at the farm level or at the processer
level? Why?
New/thorny questions asked by
Are you ensuring there is not double accounting occurring? i.e. Are contractor
attendees
paying for their emissions on farm, and then are those emissions also captured in
[Duplicate this row as needed]
overseer? Thinking with fertiliser, cultivating etc
What was the “administration” that rendered vineyards and orchards outside the
programme? Surely most vineyards have already audit processes in place that
could be utilised for verifying that plants/trees remained in the ground and had
not been taken out? For emissions: the proposal was 40 tonnes of fertiliser, but few
should be above it.
6
Al en + Clarke
Agricultural Emissions Pricing Consultation – The Ministry for the Environment and the Ministry for Primary Industries
For sequestration: the question is whether the sequestration is maintained over
time and administering the penalties if the additional sequestration is not
maintained.
Is there a chance that the advisory board wil become political appointments when
appointed by ministers rather than by the ministers and He Waka Eke Noa Jointly?
Future enhancements
Did attendees prefer a
tradeable
methane quota? What benefits did they
cite?
What concerns did attendees have
about
tradeable methane quotas?
What concerns did attendees share
about an
interim processer-level
levy?
What
alternatives to an interim
processer-level levy did attendees
share?
Question:
New/thorny questions asked by
attendees
Answer:
[Duplicate this row as needed]
7
Al en + Clarke
Agricultural Emissions Pricing Consultation – The Ministry for the Environment and the Ministry for Primary Industries
Impacts and support
what sort of transitional support wil be provided for Māori landowners? Revenue recycling
governance for both Maori and
What assistance will be available for hill country sheep and beef farmers with few mitigation
How did attendees believe the system
options available? We are doing further work.
would
impact them?
Is one of the intended outcomes of the emissions pricing scheme to reduce the number of
What
support did attendees believe wil sheep, beef and dairy cattle? No, the objective is to reduce emissions we are proposing to use
be needed?
mitigation to avoid leakage and reduction of animal
Follow up: If as Darran says 'we are trying to reduce emissions leakage' why did the
presenters predict a 65% leakage at the start of the presentation?
Follow up answer: This is not something we want, we are encouraging mitigation uptake and
management practices.
What impact did attendees think the
pricing scheme wil have on their
We are concerned about less spending, depopulation, less spending, etc. Farmers
communities?
were bewiled and there seem to be no apologies and not measures to change it.
How can
rural communities be
Can you justify it or what support is planned for rural communities?
supported?
Did attendees share specific
impacts
for Māori?
How did attendees think the
Crown
should
protect relevant
iwi and Māori
interests?
8
Al en + Clarke
Agricultural Emissions Pricing Consultation – The Ministry for the Environment and the Ministry for Primary Industries
Question: How is charging for emissions going to reduce emissions when there are
no mitigations available? When there are no mitigations, it just becomes another
New/thorny questions asked by
tax does it not?
attendees
[Duplicate this row as needed]
Answer:
As a beef farmer, if we gathered our cows twice a day to collect their manure in a
pond, would we have the same mitigation options as dairy?
Implementation, verification, compliance and enforcement
What feedback did attendees have on
the proposed
governance structure?
What did attendees think should be
included in the post-implementation
review in 2030?
What feedback did attendees have on
the proposed approach to
monitoring
and verification?
Did attendees support a
government-
run or third-party verification system?
Why?
9
Al en + Clarke
Agricultural Emissions Pricing Consultation – The Ministry for the Environment and the Ministry for Primary Industries
Who did attendees believe should
fund
the
administration of the scheme?
Did attendees have feedback on the
proposed approach to
cost-recovery?
Question:
New/thorny questions asked by
attendees
Answer:
[Duplicate this row as needed]
Other/General
Emission leakage and how our trade partners are going to accept that this
Did attendees have
any other
proposal wil result in increase emissions across the globe. We don’t expect any
feedback on the proposals?
push back, we are aiming to improve and increase how exports as much as we
can.
Is the agriculture sector asked to cool on behalf of other sectors? Methane should
not be calculated the way it is. Is it a question of metrics?
New/thorny questions asked by
attendees
Answer: each particle for methane warms the atmosphere, we are scheduling the
pricing based on the national targets.
[Duplicate this row as needed]
Follow up: I accept that the current methane targets are outside of HWEN but
current science rates these methane targets as a cooling effect.
10
Al en + Clarke
Agricultural Emissions Pricing Consultation – The Ministry for the Environment and the Ministry for Primary Industries
The split gas approach recognises that as every methane unit is being emitted,
another is being oxidised so if emissions are stable there is no warming - how can
you say each methane unit is stil additive?
Was the impact on food prices included in the government model ing?
Answer: because dairy and red meat productions are mainly exported, their prices
are driven by overseas market, so it wil not have an impact on the domestic
markets.
Australia has excluded agriculture from their emissions trading scheme. Wil this not make
them more competitive in the markets?
Answer: constantly competing for markets, and there are high demand , but we
don’t see any changes in our trading stands with our partners.
Follow up: so you are saying we are not going to be getting a premium for having
lower carbon emissions so is al the costs going to be on the producer with no
benefit in the world market
Has there been any consideration as to how to limit our most productive land turning into
forestry and affecting future food security
It’s a shared and understood problem, we are consulting on it. We do not make decisions on
the individuals, but it is under significant consideration at the moment.
11
