As regular readers of this column will know, it has always struck me as strange that the organic production lobby has remained largely unchallenged by this industry, despite the fact that so much of its PR message is dedicated to decrying everything that is, by definition, not organic.

This view has never been borne of an anti-organic sentiment per se, but rather of a frustration that so much damage can be done to consumer perceptions of 98 per cent of an industry that only produces healthy, nutritional, and above all perfectly safe fruit and vegetables.

I’m delighted to say that, through the Re:fresh Conference, we are in a position to provide a balanced position on the organic v conventional debate, for what we believe is the first time in this industry. Sunday's lead story on freshinfo will detail our plans, but I feel it is important to stress that we are not attempting to grind an axe for one camp or the other.

We want the industry as a whole to have a better understanding of the differences between the two methods of growing, and use that to promote informed discussion, whether that be in orchards, offices, packhouses, the media, or around dinner tables with non-produce people.

Only in that way will the debate properly reflect the merits of both sides of the coin. Each has more plus points than minuses to offer the consumer, and neither has to live independently of the other for the industry to thrive.