Baxter and Stafford v. M.A.F.

Press, 24 June 1983, Page 9

Baxter and Stafford v. M.A.F.

Mr Peter Stafford farms 86ha at West Melton, of which all except one hectare has been declared schedule one land under the Potato Cyst Nematode Regulations, preventing the growing of seed potatoes.

The farm is not an economic unit without the returns from seed potatoes, he maintains, and he has not been able to properly utilise an irrigation system installed in 1974-75, about the time the declaration for P.C.N. was imposed on his land.

He is heavily mortgaged and after trying for some years to grow seed potatoes on unirrigated leased land he has now sold all his specialised potato cultivation equipment. “Some of the money

received from the sale of machinery had to go towards meeting our legal costs. After 20 years establishing myself as a group one seed producer that is very hard to take,” he said. “I haven’t got the money to pay any further court costs.

“I went to court to expose the injustices being done to potato growers generally by the irresponsibility and over-reactions of the M.A.F. “I have lived with potato, pests all along and the seriousness of P.C.N., as made out by the M.A.F., was something I could never come to terms with.

“As we approached the High Court challenge all logic dictated that the M.A.F. would seek a compromise, but they didn’t,” he said.

Mr Murray Baxter and his son, Stuart, farm a property of 170 ha near Sheffield and they were growers of group one certified seed potatoes for many years before 1975.

Some 10 to 15ha were grown every year and returns per hectare were nearly double those from any other crops. They are continuing to grow seed potatoes on leased land and have paid tribute to those buyers, particularly in the Nelson region, who “have stuck with us.”

"I have always been of the opinion, and still am, that a mistake was made in 1975 by Miss Nicol in identifying P.C.N. on our property and that the M.A.F. was grossly negligent in not verifying it with a second opinion,” Mr Murray Baxter said.

“How to prove that has been the problem.

“The Judge said the standard of proof we were asking for in identification of P.C.N. was too high.

“But we are talking about something that condemns a man, his wife, his family and his farm to a 15-year sentence, with all the stigma and persecution that goes with it, with no compensation.

“We have spent thousands of dollars trying to get a

simple mistake rectified. “The M.A.F. tried to prove it does not make mistakes. “We still want a full public inquiry,” he said.