OIA26-0679 Response – The OIA was about waste-derived products being applied to farms, especially in Gore/Southland.

The OIA OIA26-0679 was about waste-derived products being applied to farms, especially in Gore/Southland.

In plain terms, it asked whether agencies held records showing:

• what waste-derived fertilisers, soil conditioners, composts, biosolids, trade-waste or recovered nutrient products were being supplied or applied to farms
• what testing existed for contaminants like heavy metals, PFAS, chemicals, pathogens, nitrogen/phosphorus, etc.
• what farmers were told before accepting or applying those products
• who carried liability if contamination, freshwater effects, market-access risk, or enforcement action followed
• whether MPI, EPA, Environment Southland, MfE, Gore District Council or suppliers had verified the safety/disclosure position before farmers could be blamed

What was achieved: the request forced the issue onto the record. EPA transferred parts of the request to MPI on 20 July 2026. MPI acknowledged it, asked for clarification, then refused the original and follow-up request on 23 July 2026 under section 18(h) of the OIA. Nick’s latest email confirms MPI says that refusal covered both the transferred EPA request and the 22 July 2026 follow-up.

So the achievement is not disclosure of documents. The achievement is that MPI has now made a clear, reviewable refusal decision. That gives you a pathway to the Ombudsman.

Did they answer in full? No. They answered procedurally, not substantively.

They did not provide the records requested. They did not itemise what MPI holds or does not hold. They did not answer the central question about verified evidence, farmer disclosure, product safety, liability, or MPI’s role. They simply declined under section 18(h) and now say they will explain their basis to the Ombudsman if a review is opened.

So the short version is: the OIA was about evidence and accountability for waste-derived farm inputs; MPI did not answer it in full; they refused it, which now needs Ombudsman review.

Farmers beware if you land isn’t tested for toxins prior to adding the fertilizer, ypu could be liable for environmental damage.