News 
 Australian Rural News 
 Agribusiness and General 
 General 
 Chilean table grapes don't sit well 

Chilean table grapes don't sit well

12 Apr, 2011 11:49 AM
THE first shipment of Chilean table grapes is set to arrive in Australia next week, and for local growers, it has been described as a "kick in the guts".

Nearly six years after a Howard Government report gave the go-ahead, Chilean table grapes will land on Australian shores next week, the Australian Table Grape Association chief executive officer, Jeff Scott, admitted.

The importer and destination will not be known until the grapes arrive but Mr Scott said the imported products would generally be of lower quality to locally-grown produce.

"Australia produces the best table grapes in the world," Mr Scott said.

"Consumers need to know the quality of the Chilean produce just doesn't stack up because it has to be fumigated with methyl bromide to kill any insects as well as being treated with sulphur dioxide and carbon dioxide."

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
Is there no end to this journalistic bias? So now it is the fault of the Howard government that we too have grapes (of wrath) from Chile in our shops.

Richard Fox would do well to follow the adventures of Simon Crean and then tell us about the FTAs that are being negotiated by the current Labor govt.

This is just the beginning.

The table grape industry in Chile has grown from 67000 tonnes in 1980 to 1.2 million tonnes in 2008 (USDA). A rate of growth that cannot be matched anywhere in the world except perhaps China?

Australia exports about 50% of the table grapes it produces.

Methyl bromide is used on virtually all fresh produce imported in to Australia.

Sulphur is widely used in the grape industry in Australia.

We are surrounded by carbon dioxide, we breath it out for goodness sake!

Mr Scott will bring the 'grapes of wrath' down on his own and his industry's head if he continues with his insinuation that 'dangerous' chemicals are being used on imported produce, so consumers should avoid them.

He invites an audit of his own industry and the chemicals that are used by growers in the safe production of food.

Posted by Roger Crook, 12/04/2011 1:45:28 PM
Mr Scott should be concentrated in seeking more original paths to improve local competition for table grapes. Australia and Chile have a strong bilateral relationship, based on many shared interests and cooperation in a range of international fora. Both countries are major southern hemisphere mining and agricultural economies, with a distinct Asia-Pacific orientation. As members of the Cairns Group, Australia and Chile work to ensure that agricultural trade reform issues are a priority in the WTO Doha Round. Within APEC, Australia and Chile cooperate to promote trade and investment liberalisation in the Asia-Pacific region. Chile will be a strong and well known food power by 2017, and not only table grapes. Insinuating bad practices of real competitors can easily be unveiled by intelligent and well informed consumers. Chilean table grape industry, as many others, are world class and earning more markets thanks to its quality and competitiveness . It is time to wake up, not being arrogant and overconfident in our success.
Posted by Dario, 12/04/2011 8:53:05 PM
Aussie grape growers need to lift their game if they don't like competition from imports. Bad-mouthing competitors is for fools.
Posted by dickytiger, 13/04/2011 12:36:24 PM
That is a ridiculous comment dickytiger. Aust producers can't compete against the level of wages in countries like Chile.
Posted by R, 13/04/2011 9:00:18 PM
Instead of importing Chilean grapes, why don't we import some Chilean farm workers on fixed contracts that are better than rates back home but lower than Australian rates.

Guest worker systems operate quite well all over the world, usually in countries with full employment.

The existing backpacker visa system is nothing more than an over priced subsidy for the tourism industry paid for by farmers.

And we sat back and watched as our entire clothing and footwear industry moved to China when we could have imported enough cheap guest workers to keep the profits, the overheads and the tax revenue here.

Good one, union neanderthals, shot your foot off at the knee, again.

Posted by Ian Mott, 14/04/2011 12:20:49 PM
Firstly, we have to see how much is gonna cost a Kg of Chilean grape at the supermarket. Not sure yet.

Secondly, the typical comment..."countries like"....what that really means? There is no a country like other. Would like to know how much people know about Chile and how accurate is.

Third, in Australia by law foreign workers have to be paid at the same rate of locals workers. So, there is no locum for that. Anyway, don't forget the ancestors that made "countries like" Australia and that many of them came very poor and looking for a better wage.

Fourth, once more time, it's time to leave our arrogance out.

Posted by Dario, 14/04/2011 9:33:12 PM
Mott,

Why don't we just invade PNG and take some slaves? That would be cheaper in the long run.

Or why don't we just remove all rights for anyone who is not a farmer?

Posted by blahblah, 14/04/2011 11:33:25 PM
Memo for the Mutt: next time you are in town and have enough money, wander down to your local bookstore and buy yourself a copy of Economics for Dummies. Pay particular attention (using a dictionary if the big words fox you) to the chapter on international trade. It may, just may, possibly open your mind to the world outside your selfish little self-delusionary belief of landholder entitlement at the expense of all others.
Posted by Bushie Bill, 17/04/2011 10:16:59 PM

post a comment


Screen name  *
Email address  *
Remember me?
Comment  *
 
We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.
Related Coverage
ARTICLES
POLL
Q: Do you believe that Australian farming land is currently undervalued?

Yes
(46.1%)

No
(40%)

Rural land prices are where they should be
(13.8%)

Total Votes: 427
Poll Date: 11 April, 2011



 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...