What's Happening In The Australian Organic Industry?

The Abolitionist Interviewed Holly Vyner from the Organic Federation of Australia on why Australia needs one logo/one standard for its organic produce.

Abolitionist:  Why is One Logo Needed?

OFA. There would be advantages of having one logo if there are resources for major marketing of this to consumers. One logo would make it easier for consumers to recognise at a glance that a product is certified organic. A similar example is the heart foundation tick.

The logo that has been proposed by Organic Federation of Australia (OFA) is a government logo that was designed approximately two years ago. The practicalities of having this logo on all products in our industry are debatable.

1. The logo would need to be in addition to the certifier's logo to comply with the national and overseas standards.

2. The logo would become the lowest common denominator for organic products. (Logos such as that of the "Bud logo" of Australian Certified Organic (ACO) signify a much stricter standard than other logos in the marketplace).

3. Many believe the proposed logo is a poor design. It also says "Australian Government Certified" which is incorrect. Products are certified by the certifiers which are government accredited.

4. Processors and producers already pay a levy for use of the certifiers' logos. A cost structure for the new logo has not been put forward however it is likely that a new levy would be payable once it is made compulsory.

5. The structure of Australia's organic industry is similar in set up to the United Kingdom, one of the world's most thriving organic markets with one main certifier and recognised logo with other smaller certifiers providing an alternative service.

6. The "Bud logo" of Australian Certified Organic appears on some 70% of certified organic products now and is well recognised and trusted by consumers. Many believe that it would serve the industry well as the one unifying logo. Biological Farmers of Australia (BFA), the parent body of ACO is a democratic organisation which allows its members - from farmers through to consumers - have a say in the industry and its regulation through the standards which the "Bud" represents.

Abolitionist: What's happened in the past to get it to this stage?  

OFA: The OFA has had two attempts in the past at formalising its structure and mediating with government for resources however it has failed both times. The OFA has recently had an AGM and formalised its Board and Advisory Committees. It has been vocal with media in voicing its plans for launching the new logo and also housing the National Organic Standard with Standards Australia. It has not however consulted with the BFA and the main stakeholders in the industry nor proposed how it will finance its plans. At this point in time the OFA does not represent the views of BFA and ACO.

Abolitionist: How many producers are saying they are organic yet they aren't?

OFA: There are still many products on the domestic marketplace that claim to be organic, however do not display a logo from one of the accredited certifiers. There is no guarantee that these products are organic. Consumers must be educated to look for a certification mark to know that what they are buying is in fact organic.

If launched, the new logo previously mentioned will not solve this problem. It requires government to regulate the use of the term "organic" on labelling and restrict it to certified products as has been done in overseas countries. The Australian Government shows no sign of doing this despite much lobbying from certifiers on behalf of industry.

Abolitionist: Is there a GE moratorium at present?  Where is Australia with regards to the GE debate?

OFA: Moratoriums lie with the State Governments. All States except Qld. and NT have moratoriums in place or are establishing them.

On 5^th August 2005 a submission of recommendations for the Gene Technology Act Review was prepared by Sam Statham and Scott Kinnear, BFA spokespeople, on behalf of BFA.

12 recommendations were made in total for remedy of deficiencies of the Act.

The submission is available for download from the BFA website under BFA Members, Subcommittee Groups.

Australia's first Serious GE Contamination incidents:

On 15^th July and 9^th August 2005, BFA sent two media releases regarding two incidences of GE Canola Contamination.

The first contamination was found in Victoria in a shipment of canola destined for Japan. Follow up testing confirmed that seed lines were the source of the contamination. Spokesperson Scott Kinnear said "It is likely that the contamination has come from imported seed canola from Nth America, where it is widely acknowledged that seed stocks of conventional lines of canola, corn and soy are contaminated with GE."

"Given that AQIS does not require seed importers to verify that seed is GE free, this has been a disaster waiting to happen."

Scott went on to say that the introduction of GE screen program would be necessary to avoid future contaminations and that a clean up operation would need to be implemented at the expense of seed companies.

"Australia cannot risk its international GE free premium markets for all our grains... Under no circumstances must Australian Governments consider introducing a tolerance level for GE contamination in seed to deal with this problem."

At the beginning of August a second contamination was confirmed following tests conducted by the WA government, confirming trace amounts of GM canola in commercial seed lines.

Scott stressed "A recall of contaminated seed and State Government orders to destroy contaminated crops in the ground now are required to ensure we remain GM free."

"This is Australia's first serious GM contamination incident and we have not approved the crops for sale. It proves the impossibility of stopping GM material from shifting into Non GM crops".

Abolitionist:  Are organic farmers aware that you can't have it both ways?  That GE produce would ruin the clean marketing of Organic produce?

OFA: Yes, most organic farmers are aware of this fact. BFA through its publications educates its members on this fact.

Abolitionist: Why is organic produce still so expensive? 

OFA: Most importantly, food grown using intensive methods is too cheap. It has high health, social and environmental costs such as sickness, cleaning up of polluted waterways, loss of biodiversity, etc. The higher cost of organic food represents the true cost of growing nutritious, high quality, chemical free produce.

The production costs for growing organically can be higher due to more labour involved with weeding and nurturing soil without quick solutions such as chemical herbicides, etc.

The cost of buying organic will go down slightly. Currently much of the market is still in its niche capacity. As organics becomes more mainstream, the economy of scale will assist in bringing prices down, however there will still be a premium paid for quality organic food.

Abolitionist: While establishing a national standard, what countries or advisors are you asking for assistance?

OFA: The industry already has standards in place which continue to be developed and maintained by the certifiers. In fact Australia is both more uniform and better regulated than almost all other countries combined. In the case of ACO, the BFA Organic Standards Committee maintains the Organic Standard with the input from its members and stakeholders being the producers, processors and traders that are regulated by it.