ews that the availability of southern hemisphere and US topfruit is under threat, following the decision to drastically lower the maximum residue level of diphenylamine, has got importers up in arms over what it perceives as overly stringent EC regulations.

The issue has once again raised the question of whether both EU and domestic legislation is helping or hindering importers. Nowhere have these issues caused more friction than on the phytosanitary side, with leading industry figures voicing grave concerns over the latest EU directives, such as the controversial ones surrounding citrus imports.

A decision to clamp down on shipments affected by citrus black spot this season means imports will come to a halt after five findings of the disease. Importers feel this is too low – especially as there were over 30 findings last year. “Once the northern hemisphere citrus season is finished we could have a very serious problem,” says one citrus importer. “The bar is set so low that it is set to fail for us importers, which begs the question of whether this is perhaps a political decision by the EU to try to eliminate competition from the southern hemisphere.”

The allegation that European policy is being tailored around vested interests is hard to ignore when considering the facts surrounding citrus black spot. Research from the US, where the disease can also be found, shows no evidence of the virus being transferrable from fruit to tree. And, even if it were, the UK for example does not have any citrus production, meaning citrus black spot does not pose a threat to the industry.

“At the moment we have three or four European citrus-producing countries dictating to the rest of us what we can and can’t do,” comments the citrus importer. “Spain, Italy and Greece seem to be sticking their oar in. It seems out of kilter.”

Especially, he says, because importing fruit affected by the disease was never made into a problem in the past. “Citrus black spot has plagued a number of export countries for some years; it’s endemic in any production, so why it has been made into an issue now I don’t know. The business of freshly squeezed juice, which is the one we supply, will be in dire trouble if we have no fruit.”

The juicing sector is relatively small compared to the table fruit sector though, and the prospect of putting a stop to citrus shipments from the southern hemisphere is not one to be taken lightly, as it could result in empty shelves.

So how did it come to this, and what do the policy makers have to say on the matter?

The Fresh Produce Consortium is closely involved in influencing EU import policy, and chief executive Nigel Jenney admits there are various elements that are of concern to the industry. “Our approach has always been that plant health regulations should be risk-based – any measure should be proportionate,” he says. “There are pests that are of concern elsewhere in the EU that aren’t of concern to us; we don’t grow citrus for example.”

The other concern Jenney points out is the issue of who pays for the costs of controls and inspections. “We fought very hard on this. There needs to be a full review to make sure costs are proportionate to the service we get.”

The FPC has been very vocal in its criticism of Fera, since 2011 when it organised industry briefings with the government department to explain changes to plant health inspections at key UK ports of entry.

The FPC’s main concern was the proposed measures it said would result in additional charges of at least £250,000 – “a cynical imposition on the fresh produce industry”. Jenney adds: “We simply want an effective and least total cost solution but, when challenged, Fera appears not to know its real outlay. The industry continues to bear the financial burden of Fera’s inefficiencies; it’s a monopoly that is unaccountable.”

Like other critics, the FPC has made it clear it considers Fera’s proposals mere “box-ticking” for the European Commission and that it should focus its efforts elsewhere “where there are real risks” and deliver a better service to importers and their agents.

When asked to comment on this, Dr Helen Crews, head of better regulation at Fera, says figures from the most recent review, at end of 2012, show costs have gone down, but that it varies between the different sectors. “I know that in the seed potato classification scheme, the increase they are going to see in their fees in April 2013 is less than they thought it was going to be,” she says, but can’t be more specific.

The next taskforce meeting, hosted by the FPC, will take place on 19 March and top of the agenda will be the third phase of fee increases for imports. “We will be telling them what this year’s increases will look like, and next year’s,” reveals Crews, “and discussing in what areas we can make changes.”

There are currently seven taskforces in place to improve consultation liaison with the industry. Matters that fall into the remit of the imports taskforce include looking at Egyptian potato imports, seed potato classification schemes, ‘plant passporting’, licensing for plant health purposes and exports. Crews says it was agreed quite early on what the priorities were. Importers were happy with the processing and increased resources we now have at Heathrow, as well as the largest points of entry.

However, the industry made the point that the volumes of trade at Felixstowe Sea Port and Tilbury were very high and that the service agreement had to be reviewed. “If they have to pay for storage there, it gets expensive,” explains Crews. “What will cost us more is if we don’t get the turnaround we need there. So we worked with their people and the processes in place. With our combined expertise we agreed some improvements. There is now weekend cover and at peak times. From my perspective that imports taskforce has worked very well.”

The UK’s citrus importers, international growers, and possibly a few supermarket buyers will be hoping for a similar risk-based approach to prevent a ban on South African citrus imports to the EU this season. —