Country of origin food labels are mandatory and free range eggs have regulated labelling requirements, too, but the organic sector finds itself snubbed by a federal government decision rejecting a mandatory national scheme to protect organic-grown food from fraudsters.
Australian Organic Limited research indicates about a third of consumers are misled into buying organic products which are not certified as truly organic.
The peak industry body is furious Australia remains the only developed country not to have consistent, domestic regulation for certified organic product labels.
Current voluntary rules not only left consumers ripped off as they occasionally shelled out premium prices for uncertified "organic" products, but exporters were penalised, too, because overseas buyers wanted proof of a nationally regulated standard before they readily accepted a product's organic credentials.
RELATED READING
Independent advice to the government considered four national regulation options, finding the current non-mandatory standard was the worst case cost-benefit scenario.
Australian Organic was alarmed and dismayed by Agriculture Minister Murray Watt's decision to "place domestic regulation into the too-hard basket", despite his department's own advice finding the status quo left the $2 billion industry and consumers worse off.
"We represent thousands of producers who overwhelmingly believe, as clearly does every other developed nation in the world, that a mandatory domestic standard is vital for consumer confidence and export growth," said AOL chief executive, Niki Ford.
"Australia rightfully regulates labelling on country of origin and who can claim their product is 'free range', but strangely our regulatory regime falls silent on the word 'organic'."
Mr Watt had ignored the evidence from experts and the industry with last week's captain's call on domestic regulation.
Ms Ford said years of work identifying the best course of action for consumers and producers, who operated in highly competitive world markets, appeared to have been overlooked.
"All we are asking for is a level playing field and yet with this captain's call we are not even in the game," she said.
Recommendations made to the government showed mandatory regulation on organic labelling would spur a 13 per cent rise in the number of producers looking to enter the export trade in the near future.
'Embarrassing'
The organic sector's frustration was shared by former Agriculture Minister and Nationals leader, David Littleproud, who noted the current minister "embarrassingly admitted he only has the capacity to focus on just a few areas of the portfolio".
"He has left the booming organics industry stranded on its pathway to a long sought-after national domestic standard," Mr Littleproud said.
"Minister Watt's letter to Australian Organic Limited said he had other pressing challenges he needed to put his focus on, namely biosecurity, natural disaster preparedness and response, and agricultural workforce concerns."
The previous coalition government began a pathway towards reforming the organic sector's regulatory requirements, establishing an industry-led advisory group in 2020.
"A consistent national organic standard is critical in opening up new export opportunities while protecting our international reputation against unscrupulous exporters, who attempt to send inferior products to our international markets," he said.
"A national standard would also manage the import of organic products."
Import risks
Currently imports were not required to be certified or to comply with any particular standard.
Mr Littleproud said without domestic regulation, exporters invariably had to pay extra compliance costs to meet the requirements of multiple overseas buyers in different countries.
Locally, shopper confidence was jeopardised when a product with only a tiny amount of organic content could be passed off in Australia as organic.
Ms Ford said an independent PwC report on regulatory standards for the industry had sat with the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry for more than a year.
The financial services firm's findings, based on a cost-benefit analysis, concluded the current non-regulatory option returned a worse result than any of the four regulatory alternatives it considered for the government.
The report was finally released less than 48 hours ahead of the Minister's surprise announcement rejecting the industry recommendations.
Ms Ford said neither Mr Watt, nor department officials consulted with the 16-member Organic Industry Advisory Group of experts set up to advise on labelling regulation, prior to the announcement.
She said PwC's cost-benefit analysis also revealed just a one per cent lift in organic exports would propel all regulatory options "to a positive benefit cost ratio over the 10-year period".
The report estimated 46pc of the current hindrances to organic exports could be addressed by Australia having an equivalent regulation regime to its international partners.
Start the day with all the big news in agriculture! Sign up below to receive our daily Farmonline newsletter.
Andrew Marshall
Andrew Marshall is the group agribusiness writer for ACM's state agricultural weeklies and websites. He is a former editor at The Land and has worked in various Rural Press group roles in Canberra, North Richmond (NSW) and Toowoomba (Qld).
Andrew Marshall is the group agribusiness writer for ACM's state agricultural weeklies and websites. He is a former editor at The Land and has worked in various Rural Press group roles in Canberra, North Richmond (NSW) and Toowoomba (Qld).
