The government says it is still trying to get the European Union to make harsh rules on deforestation less onerous for New Zealand farmers.
It says NZ producers do not need to be incentivised over deforestation, because it is not happening – in fact the opposite is occurring.
Australia is also trying to get the EU to change its stance.
“I have raised this issue consistently in my engagements with the EU, most recently when I met directly with the EU vice-president and other and European counterparts at the OECD a fortnight ago,” Trade Minister Todd McClay said.
“My EU counterparts were receptive, and I will continue to raise this issue at every opportunity in international fora.”
The rules on deforestation were passed in June last year and come into effect in stages, with large businesses affected from December and small businesses from June 2025.
The rules state that agricultural and wood products sold to the EU should not be derived from land that was deforested after the end of 2020.
When these regulations were first proposed, it appeared that NZ would not suffer, since most NZ farm land was deforested in the 19th century.
And in more recent years, there has been net afforestation, not deforestation, especially on lower quality sheep and beef land.
But proving this to be true was always going to be expensive for farmers and their export companies.
There would have to be full descriptions of products and their quantities, as well as the geolocation of land where they or their ingredients were produced. There would also have to be full timings of production, full contact details for producers and their suppliers, as well as conclusive and verifiable proof that goods were not produced on deforested land.
Countries are due to be classified by EU officials according to their level of risk, and NZ is hoping to be deemed low risk, if any risk at all, but this designation is still awaited.
Seven commodities are affected by the EU rules, of which cattle is the main one for NZ.
At one stage, sheepmeat was intended to be on the list, but this was excluded after intensive lobbying by Beef + Lamb NZ (BLNZ) along with British sheep farmers.
BLNZ is now arguing that sheep and beef systems are interlinked, so recognition that sheepmeat does not contribute to deforestation should also extend to beef.
Earlier this month, Australian Agriculture Minister Murray Watt called for a delay in the administration of the new rules.
McClay has a similar view.
“Officials have been engaging with the EU bilaterally and alongside a number of countries sharing the same concerns,” he said.
“They have also raised our concerns in the WTO context and will continue to do so. For a country like New Zealand, with strong and enforced regulations, deforestation is not an issue. This should be recognised by the EU.
“The regulation would place an unnecessary burden on New Zealand and its implementation is likely to be counterproductive.”
BLNZ said it remains unclear just how the regulations would be administered and it is wanting NZ to be placed in the low-risk category. But it has not so far heard back from the EU on this matter, and said even a low-risk classification would require the provision of whole-of-life data on beef animals, which it said would be “challenging using current traceability and assurance systems”.
