QUESTIONS ARE piling up as the Government launches its inquiry into Fonterra’s false botulism scare.
One month ago, questions were swirling around Fonterra’s handling of product recall and how a dirty pipe at a Waikato factory could derail our global dairy exports. Fonterra management’s inquiry has traced back manufacturing of the potentially contaminated WPC80.
However, attention is now focused on the tests in New Zealand. Enter AgResearch, an SOE describing itself as “one of New Zealand’s leading research organisations”. AgResearch’s purpose, its website says, is to enhance the value, productivity and profitability of New Zealand’s pastoral, agri-food and agri-technology sector value-chains to contribute to economic growth and beneficial environmental and social outcomes for New Zealand”.
If Fonterra is to be believed, it was AgResearch’s test results received on August 2 that triggered the precautionary recall of WPC80 from eight customers. The recall was complex as the 38 metric tonnes of WPC sold to customers had been turned into a variety of value added products – infant formula, sports drinks and animal feed.
For its part, AgResearch says it never confirmed the presence of Clostridium botulinum in the isolates provided by the co-op. It had detected the possible presence of Clostridium botulinum and recommended further testing.
This calls into question Fonterra’s testing regime. As the world’s largest exporter of dairy products, shouldn’t it have access to testing facilities that can confirm immediately the presence of bacteria and harmful substances in any of its dairy products?
It is clear Fonterra acted solely on the test results from AgResearch in initiating the recall and going public. Was it the correct decision? Apparently not, and in hindsight more tests outside New Zealand would have confirmed that the strain present in WPC80 was Clostridium sporogenes, and not the fatal Clostridium botulinum.
The damage to Fonterra, and New Zealand’s trading credentials, anxiety to consumers and losses to customers caught up in the recall is hard to measure. Surely, some of the eight companies involved in the recall will be recouping their losses from Fonterra.
Fonterra provides ingredients to customers worldwide. While the safety and quality of its products may not be questioned by these customers, they will be concerned about its loose testing regime— where one set of test results can be misinterpreted and set off a train of events as seen last month.
Fonterra, AgResearch and MPI will all have their say at the Government inquiry. Whatever the inquiry concludes, steps must be taken to prevent a repeat of the WPC80 fiasco.
For Fonterra and AgResearch’s sake, let’s hope everything in life happens for a reason and something better always comes out of it.