The 2022 He Waka Eke Noa Federated Farmers consultation survey was open from the 16th to 22nd of February and amassed 774 responses. The survey asked questions on several topic areas including information about the respondent, their age and stage of career, farm system, financial implications, target setting, levy rates and pricing, sequestration, influencing change, prioritisation of trade-offs and the final options.
The following is a summary of survey highlights:
- Preventing emissions leakage was the number one concern from our members during consultation. As the majority (72.4%) responded they would reduce their production in response to an emissions levy, they were extremely concerned that this overall reduction in our production, it would influence a less efficient increase in milk and meat production overseas causing an increase in greenhouse gas emissions overall. Several respondents specifically referenced the Paris accord in the comments section.
- While anecdotally there has been a lot of noise demanding Federated Farmers walk away from HWEN, only 22.2% felt this was a viable option when provided with context on what this meant. 37.1% opted for the farm levy and 32.3% a hybrid option beginning with the processor and in time moving to the farm levy. Only 5.8% opted for the processor levy and 2.6% the ETS backstop.
- Without the option of a hybrid or walking away, 80.8% opted for the farm levy. There was a lot of variation in this within farm systems that is discussed in the paper.
- Federated Farmers key concern about the introduction of a levy was the potential impact a levy would have on reducing on-farm production, but not necessarily reducing greenhouse gas emissions either here in New Zealand or overseas. When asked if there was a risk that an emissions levy could result in you reducing your on-farm production, 72.4% said yes, with 17.5% unsure (table 2.1).
- Another concern Federated Farmers had when we received anecdotal feedback from our members prior to the survey, was the number of farmers who felt they would leave the industry as a result of these measures. In the survey, when discussing exiting the industry, 46.3% felt they would be influenced to leave the industry if there was a levy imposed
- Pricing in general was a concern through our He Waka Eke Noa consultation, with little certainty on what prices would look like. The opportunity to have some certainty in the form of a price ceiling equal to what farmers would have been charged was seen as critical by 59.8% of respondents and yes it should be there but optional by 31.8%. Only 8.4% of respondents felt there didn’t need to be a price ceiling (table 3.1). Summary 3 He Waka Eke Noa Federated Farmers of New Zealand
- When asked if they supported an output rebate, only 9.2% said they didn’t support an output rebate with 59.6% saying yes and 31% didn’t know (table 3.3). Those that answered yes to supporting an output rebate were then asked if this was a nice to have or a need to have. 63.9% felt this was a need to have and 36.1% a nice to have (table 3.3). There were no significant differences in age, industry or production system.
- Only 11.4% of respondents supported the funding model for the proposed He Waka Eke Noa sequestration schemes in which farmers must pay for all recognition of sequestration. 49% felt the ETS should be changed and 39.6% that the government should fund this (table 5.1).
- The majority (59.9%) supported a one-off payment to recognise those farmers that maintain existing carbon stocks in the form of mature vegetation, 31% didn’t know and only 9.2% felt only additional sequestration should be considered (table 5.1).
- In nearly all cases Meat & Wool and Dairy were consistent in how they answered to the average and largely each other with a few interesting points of difference. Dairy were slightly more likely to leave the industry at 49% (46% average, Meat and Wool were below average at 43%). However, Meat & Wool respondents that would be influenced to leave were more likely to sell to carbon farming at 48% (38% average, Dairy below average at 32%).
- Dairy wanted to see more of current levy being paid on meat and milk going to research on mitigation at 89% (average 83%, Meat and Wool sat below average at 78% M&W).
- While Dairy and Meat and Wool were largely consistent with one another, Arable were much more firm and decisive, and were very different in several key areas compared to the larger groups