Food waste recommendation could see farmers fined for surplus produce
Farmers with excess produce or storm damaged crops could be whacked with a tax or fine for contributing to food waste.
Farmers could be fined for surplus produce or storm damaged crops contributing to food waste, if the State Government accepts a number of recommendations made in a recent inquiry into Victorian food security.
But growers who mobilise waste and seconds produce could be reimbursed with tax incentives should they donate excess fruit and vegetables to food charities.
The Legislative Council Legal and Social Issues Committee inquiry into food security in Victoria’s final report, published yesterday, made a number of recommendations including enshrining the right to adequate food in the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities, and recommending the State Government advocate to the Federal Government to support implementation of a national food donation tax incentive.
Recommendation 13 called for the Victorian Government to explore “potential penalties for food waste occurring along the supply chain to prevent the wastage of food that could otherwise be consumed”.
Victoria Farmers Federation president Emma Germano said it was difficult to imagine any farmer “intentionally creating waste or not trying to use their waste”.
“It’s probably more directed at the supermarket or retail level,” Ms Germano said.
“There’s no real evidence in the report suggesting (a penalty) would increase food donations.”
Ms Germano said the recommendation was “unjustified and completely impractical”.
“The way it’s written insinuates that people are thoughtless or intentionally wasting food and I think that’s outrageous.”
Committee member and Liberal MP for Western Victoria Joe McCracken said a food donation tax incentive over a penalty for producers with wasted food was “a more positive way” to tackle the issue.
“That’s what concerns me the most … I don’t think farmers should be penalised. How do you measure food waste on a farm?” Mr McCracken said.
“It would apply through the supply chain and we have no clear indication of who would police that.”
Mr McCracken said the recommendation would need to be explored, as it was not clear how the penalty would be implemented.
“It could be in the form of a penalty notice, a tax, a fine … even a levy for waste. How do we measure food waste? All these things need to be clarified,” Mr McCracken said.
“I think it’s an incredibly broad report and has much more of a city centred focus … I don’t think it focuses on the rural sector. I think farmers are doing it tough at the moment and I don’t think the government is in the position to help them.”
Sustain: the Australian Food Network, an organisation working to protect Victorian food systems and agriculture, made a submission to the inquiry regarding the connection between food production and food security and called for a more comprehensive, holistic approach to the supply chain.
Sustain executive director Nick Rose said farmers are the foundation of the food system and food security, and need to be “the starting point” of any discussion.
Sustain is a charitable organisation working with food networks statewide to support sustainable food supply chains, including promoting urban agriculture and community food networks.
“Whatever we might say about food waste, the first thing is our farmers are being taken care of, and rewarded, and that the next generation of farmers and beyond are similarly taken care of,” Dr Rose said.
“Penalising instead of generating waste, that could be where the recommendation is directed to the supermarkets, saying you’re making the decisions about what people eat and what people get paid, and we’re going to hold you to account.
“This is an opportunity for the government to step in and reduce and redress some of the imbalances as the supermarkets become more powerful.”