Sweet or swindle? UK attacks Kiwi manuka honey industry

$1.2b in exports threatened by accusations of unscrupulous operators and fake labelling, reports Gerard Hutching.

Consumers are being misled over New Zealand-made manuka honey, and purchasing it at vastly inflated prices, according to the latest swipe at the industry from the British media.

Reports from the United Kingdom claim that New Zealand honey growers are still committing what they have branded ‘‘The Great Manuka Honey Swindle’’, potentially damaging one of the industry’s most lucrative export markets.

Influential trade magazine The Grocer magazine has published a story headlined ‘‘Manuka honey, why haven’t New Zealand’s guidelines worked?’’, which claims 2014 guidelines introduced by the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) have achieved nothing.

Consumers were continuing to pay ‘‘way over the odds for honey that in many instances was no better for consumers (health-wise) than bog-standard bush honey’’, it said.

The Grocer was following up on an article it published two years ago headlined ‘‘The Great Manuka Honey Swindle’’ in which it said consumers were paying hundreds of dollars a jar for the ‘‘liquid gold’’.

Unscrupulous operators were making millions from fake manuka honey, the magazine said.

The New Zealand industry currently earns $242 million in exports a year – of which manuka makes up about 80 per cent – and its reputation is at stake. An ambitious target has been set of $1.2 billion for manuka honey alone by 2028.

In 2014 MPI introduced interim labelling guidelines to offer consumers a better guarantee they were buying the genuine article.

The negative publicity comes at a time when the New Zealand manuka honey industry is seeking to develop a scientific test for manuka honey, but getting the key players to agree is proving impossible.

New Zealand honey manufacturers are split into two camps. On one side is the Unique Manuka Factor Honey Association (UMFHA) which claims to represent about 75 per cent of the industry, and includes heavyweights like Comvita in its ranks.

On the other is Canterburybased Airborne Honey, which is a family business that has been manufacturing honey for more than 100 years. Peter Bray, grandson of founder William Bray, is the managing director.

Trying to steer a middle path between the two parties is MPI, which has been charged with developing a definitive test, and is leaning towards DNA pollen sampling.

The problem is that each of the industry groups has developed its It’s an irresolvable problem. I’ve been trying to bring in a standard for manuka since the late 80s-early 90s. own test. UMFHA told a Parliamentary select committee two weeks ago that it was in the process of patenting its method – based on nectar analysis – before overseas organisations did so and left New Zealand companies hostage to a standard set elsewhere, and having to pay for testing.

At the same time UMFHA has filed an application to trademark the term New Zealand manuka honey, a process expected to take 6-18 months.

Labour’s primary industries spokesman, Damien O’Connor, said one of New Zealand’s ‘‘star industries’’ was at risk because of the wrangling.

‘‘I believe the minister has to facilitate a roundtable discussion to identify and resolve the issues that they can’t agree on and as quickly as possible to offer our international customers absolute certainty over the integrity of manuka honey,’’ O’Connor said.

Peter Bray said Airborne had developed its own test based on pollen analysis, using samples that go back 30 years.

‘‘It’s an irresolvable problem. I’ve been trying to bring in a standard for manuka since the late 80s-early 90s,’’ he said.

Three years ago there had been a chance to develop a standard, but MPI had gone ‘‘weak at the knees’’ because a honey company said it would destroy 50 per cent of their business.

Bray is sceptical about testing for manuka using DNA samples. He said German researchers were world-leading and well funded, but had still been unable to develop a DNA test.

New Zealand authorities have their work cut out for them trying to ensure New Zealand companies comply with labelling rules, but exporters are known to get around the guidelines by shipping barrels which are then jarred and labelled in the UK or Europe.

The Grocer has asked MPI if New Zealand exporters have to specify what type of honey their barrels contain.

Bray said his concern was not just with New Zealand’s reputation, but also the local consumer. The numbers did not add up, he said. The annual manuka honey crop was 3000 tonnes, while the total production of all honey was 15,000 tonnes. New Zealand exported 9000 tonnes a year, virtually all of it manuka.

‘‘If you can blend your honey so that you’ve got only 5 per cent manuka in it, you can blend that 3000 tonnes into the whole 15,000-tonne crop.

‘‘The local consumer is paying about three times the price for honey that they would normally pay if this rort wasn’t going through.’’

Airborne was powerless to change the situation by charging lower prices because it would lose its suppliers, he said.