Editorial: Why no mention of threats?

The threat to contaminate baby formula came three months ago but the public has only just been warned now.

The threat to contaminate infant formula with 1080 would have posed more than one dilemma for Fonterra, Federated Farmers and police.

Finding the culprit is the first. When to tell the public was the second.

Federated Farmers and Fonterra received anonymous letters in November.

Small packages of milk powder, which later tested positive for a concentrated form of 1080, accompanied the letters. The letters carried a threat to contaminate formula with 1080 unless New Zealand stopped using the poison for pest control by the end of March.

Three months after the threats were made, the culprit is still at large, and with the end of March deadline looming, the public must be told.

The paternal instinct is a strong one, a mere whiff of risk to a young child and parents will shun the associated product.

Therefore the timing of the announcement was crucial.

If the Government left it too long to go public, Fonterra risked accusations of keeping consumers in the dark to protect revenue.

In three months, the forensic abilities of the police have been unable to identify the letter writer.

The NZ public now has three weeks to do what police have been unable to - identify the person/s who made the threats.

There is the possibility that forensic science has identified the person, but police want to gather more evidence before arresting the individual. Let's hope that's the case. Because if the collective minds of Fonterra, Federated Farmers and police agreed that three weeks was enough time for the public to out the letter writer, you'd have to question why the threats weren't made public back in November - months away from the threat deadline - with a view to bringing the guilty party to justice swiftly.