The government’s response to tampering with Australian strawberries this past year was timely, but areas to improve have been identified in a Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) report.

These include centralizing incident coordination to include relevant government agencies such as police, and improving the consistency and messaging associated with such an event. The report made seven recommendations and raised the idea of industry, government and law enforcement doing mock exercises to develop relationships and processes.

The report said all parties should review food incident response protocols and ensure formal links between regulators, health departments and police are in place for incidents involving intentional contamination and a body for the horticulture industry is required to support crisis preparedness and response in the sector.

An investigation found a complex supply chain with a need for strengthened traceability and contingency planning in the strawberry industry and other high-risk horticulture sectors.

“The power and use of social media was acknowledged as having a significant impact in this incident, both negatively potentially exacerbating ongoing tampering incidents and positively gathering consumer support for the strawberry industry,” according to the report.

Australian strawberries are grown year round by about 260 growers across six states, predominantly Queensland and Victoria. In the 2016-2017 financial year strawberry production in the country was valued at AUS$560 million (US$397 million).

Risk mitigation measures include use of metal detectors but cost is around AUS$20,000 to $30,000 (US$14,200-$21,300) and tamper proof packaging could accelerate deterioration of product quality and limit shelf life. Deliberate tampering may involve physical contaminants such as glass and plastic, or may be chemical or biological.

Supply chain vulnerabilities are the many touch points from field to pack house, transport, retail and consumer, the seasonal nature of work and labour hiring practices leading to difficulties in monitoring workers and co-mingling as produce from more than one farm or supplier is combined.

Source: foodsafetynews.com