Impasse over how to revive industry
Nelson fruitgrower groups are back up and running, but getting agreement among beleaguered orchardists on how to pull the pipfruit industry out of the mire is proving more difficult.
The re-formed Motueka Fruitgrowers Association has already met twice since November, while its smaller Mahanabased counterpart, Growlink Tasman, has been working on several initiatives aimed at giving growers more clout in their dealings with exporters.
The move to reactivate the groups followed widespread disillusionment among growers at the parlous state of the industry, which has been beset by poor returns and a lack of unity. This culminated in exporters blocking a bid by growers to take a more regulated approach to selling fruit in the newly opened Australian market by adopting a Horticultural Export Authority model.
With most Nelson growers having endured three consecutive years of losses, there have been calls for major reforms to the way fruit is sold, particularly in the important European market.
Suggestions have ranged from the formation of a Nelson grower collective to market fruit in Europe, where disorderly marketing has been a problem, to the need for industry standards to bring rogue exporters into line.
Simon Easton, chairman of the Motueka group, which is supported by 90 per cent of local orchardists, said it was still sorting out constitutional issues so it could access leftover funds.
Its main focus to date had been discussing ways to combat the heightened risk of disease this season, although there had been discussions with major players about the best way to export to Europe which ‘‘haven’t gone anywhere’’.
With so many strong personalities and parties with different business models involved, getting the players to give up their exporters and programmes in favour of a team approach would be very difficult to organise, Mr Easton said. For example, among the many issues that would need to be sorted out in any joint venture was whose fruit was sold first. ‘‘It’s a can of worms.’’
The Mahana group had suggested that exporters be made to abide by the set of rules, ‘‘but at the end of the day, if you don’t like your exporter, you don’t supply them’’. ‘‘We’ve had 10 years of deregulation, and a lot of people are set in their ways, but we are still working through what can be done.’’
Mr Easton said he was still keen on working with the Mahana growers, with the aim of eventually forming a regional group.
In the meantime, he was encouraging growers to try negotiating minimum price guarantees for their fruit, to focus on Asian markets and to look closely at growing part of their crop for juice.
Mr Easton said the high New Zealand dollar remained the biggest problem facing growers.
Growlink Tasman chairman Bill Lynch said his group would decide shortly whether to seek wider support for a draft supplier contract designed to set industry standards and stop exporters ripping growers off.
‘‘A number of growers are very annoyed about the way they are treated in terms of quality claims offshore – exporters making a bid for fruit by guaranteeing a price and then not paying it, and promising to pay on a certain date and not doing so.’’
A system where exporters were licensed and bonded would give growers a clear idea of ‘‘who is playing the game and those that aren’t’’, he said.
He agreed that forming a single group representing Nelson growers in Europe would be difficult, given that some were part of integrated operations while others were not, but they should be canvassed to see if there was a consensus over what should happen on a wide range of issues.