Lo­cal poul­try sec­tor fly­ing

Business Day - - OPINION -

Once again Fair­play has writ­ten a long-winded di­a­tribe in an at­tempt to dis­credit poul­try im­ports as EU-dumped prod­ucts. (Task team must act to end dump­ing of chicken or in­dus­try could im­plode, Oc­to­ber 10).

It is pointless re­spond­ing in kind, so al­low me to make a few im­por­tant and rel­e­vant points. The lo­cal poul­try in­dus­try is not suf­fer­ing at the mo­ment, as is claimed in the ar­ti­cle.

In fact, re­cent trad­ing re­sult re­leases have re­flected very healthy prof­its, while nu­mer­ous mar­ket com­men­ta­tors have rec­om­mended lo­cal poul­try com­pa­nies’ quoted shares as dis­tinct buy­ing op­por­tu­ni­ties. So why in heaven’s name would they re­quire fur­ther state pro­tec­tion?

Could it be that they have be­come greedy and want 100% of the mar­ket as op­posed to their cur­rent lo­cal mar­ket share in the re­gion of 85%?

Sec­ond, the EU coun­tries are barely ex­port­ing any poul­try to SA due to those mar­kets be­ing closed in the guise of health is­sues re­lated to avian in­fluenza, when the real rea­sons are to pro­tect lo­cal in­dus­try.

Lo­cal poul­try is in a very healthy state and ca­pa­ble of stand­ing on its own feet un­aided by the state, which would, of course, have to be fi­nanced by the hard-pressed con­sumer.

Lastly, Fair­play is not an in­de­pen­dent “ac­tivist” but are highly paid rep­re­sen­ta­tives of the lo­cal poul­try in­dus­try, whose bid­ding they reg­u­larly trum­pet in an ef­fort to trash le­git­i­mate poul­try im­ports.

Un­like their lo­cal coun­ter­parts, the im­ports are not in­jected with dol­lops of mu­nic­i­pal wa­ter.

David Wolpert CEO, As­so­ci­a­tion of Meat Im­porters and Ex­porters

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from South Africa

© PressReader. All rights reserved.