Licensing Of Sprays “Premature”

Press, Volume CIX, Issue 32010, 10 June 1969, Page 1

Licensing Of Sprays “Premature”

It was premature to consider restricting permission to apply agricultural chemicals until a system of certification had been soundly established, the DirectorGeneral of Agriculture (Dr A. T. Johns) said yesterday.

Dr Johns was commenting on submissions by the Contractors’ Federation in support of a system of licensing. Addressing the chemical applicators’ section of the federation in Christchurch, he said that the passing of an examination in the handling of chemicals had been suggested as a prerequisite to obtaining a licence, although provision would have to be made for exceptions to this.

Federated Farmers and orchardists had opposed the principle that only licensed contractors should be allowed to apply agricultural chemicals for hire or reward. This would mean that primary producers as well, as local bodies would be compelled to engage a licensed contractor, applicator or his employee. Dr Johns said that the Department of Agriculture hoped that as many contractors as possible would become qualified. One reason was that the Agricultural Chemicals Board considered that some of the more toxic chemicals should be applied by qualified applicators only. In some instances the use of these toxic substances was subject to permit, and the department would like to have the examination as a criterion for judging who was qualified. “I should like to commend your federation for seeking to

raise the status of those who apply agricultural chemicals . . . but I must suggest that it would be better at this stage to achieve your goal by first endeavouring to establish firmly the qualification as a hallmark of skill and competence before considering the introduction of restrictions which would limit the right to apply agricultural chemicals for hire or reward to a particular group of persons,” Dr Johns said. “In the department’s view there is everything to be gained by establishing a qualification and identifying those who are entitled to it; but it is premature, I suggest, to consider restricting the application of agricultural chemicals until a system of certification has been soundly established, sufficient qualified persons are available, and have the confidence of the public.

“My suggestion is that qualifications should be defined; a certificate of competence recognised in some official way, and the examining and certifying body established.” The chairman of the chemical applicators’ section (Mr H. R. W. Skinner) said that unless licensing was going to become compulsory, the certificates that some contractors had already obtained were “just little bits of paper." He said that it was clear from discussion at the conference that there was a deepseated division of opinion. Presenting his annual report, Mr Skinner strongly supported licensing. At present, he said, a person using chemicals which were dangerous to health and could cause death, need show nothing more than a driver’s licence.