Fran O'Sullivan and Alexander Speirs: Need to lead in standards

The Fonterra botulism scare highlighted the weakness of traceability systems.

Nearly two years on since Fonterra's so-called botulism scare shook our primary industries, the Government has signalled that change is on the horizon with the release of a report from the Dairy Traceability Working Group.

Set up at the behest of the Government and headed by Dr John Larkindale -- former New Zealand high commissioner to Australia -- the group brought together a collection of dairy and food industry representatives to investigate improvements to dairy traceability.

The result -- a report proposing new regulatory requirements for dairy traceability and an accompanying best-practice guide for dairy industry players.

The Fonterra botulism incident -- although later shown to be a false positive -- highlighted the weakness of the traceability systems in place nationally, with an unacceptable delay between the threat identification and subsequent response. It took four days after the return of the tests showing potential signs of botulism for Fonterra and the Ministry for Primary Industries to initiate a recall.

Under the recommendations laid out by the group, the benchmark for full reporting on traceability will be a 24-hour turnaround time to either MPI or an independent verifier -- a process which will require companies to undertake practical tests and mock recalls to verify their ability every 12 months.

Improving traceability beyond the present "one up, one down" system is also seen as imperative, with interoperable systems spanning the supply chain in both directions seen as an achievable new standard.

With improvements in technology and the availability of QR codes or RF devices, there's no reason that this shouldn't have been implemented already -- and could be taken a step further. QR codes in particular have an essentially zero implementation cost and could provide the ability for producers and suppliers, right down to consumers to be able to track their food from "grass to glass".

The report acknowledged that "although there are some existing standards and technologies that may deliver this kind of supply chain visibility and traceability, 'real-life' implementation of these is not yet widespread".

The group also stressed the importance of having the systems in place to make traceability and safety evolvable -- with gradual improvements and step-change developments possible -- particularly as the likes of the US and China modernise their own programmes with a view to implement more stringent legal requirements for imported food.

After the release, Food Safety Minister Jo Goodhew said: "The Government is now considering applying the report's recommendations across all food sectors."

The findings of the report are expected to be consulted on in July this year, with a view to implementation in March next year when the Food Act 2014 comes fully into force. The thought that many of the recommendations needed to be spelled out, let alone implemented is a stinging indictment on the New Zealand food export sector as a whole and draws attention to how lucky we have been to be troubled by so few major incidents.

While the report found that our traceability systems and requirements were broadly "consistent with international principles", they lagged behind the stricter conditions imposed by the US, Canada and the European Union.

For a country as reliant on its reputation as New Zealand to generate high demand and command premium prices -- particularly where dairy is concerned -- it is inexcusable that we are behind the eight-ball where food safety and regulation is concerned.

Falling in line with the rest of the world can't be the standard we hold ourselves to if we are to remain at the forefront of food exports. Instead, New Zealand must push the envelope where food safety is concerned and prove to the rest of the world that our systems are innovative, market leading and beyond reproach. Hopefully this is a first step in the right direction.