Peter Beaven: Not advancing at all fairly

To persuade hundreds of middle-aged orchardists to march to Parliament is no easy task.

But that is what happened last week when 800 angry apple-growers descended on Wellington and staged the biggest demonstration in the industry's history to protest against their continued lack of access to the Australian market.

To persuade the Government to take its closest neighbour and biggest trading partner to the World Trade Organisation over a trade issue is also no easy task. But that happened last week, too.

New Zealand apples have been banned from the Australian market since 1921. In fact, no country is allowed to export apples to Australia.

The latest in many attempts at access during the past 84 years was begun by New Zealand in 1999.

After six years of waiting, no import risk analysis has yet been completed by the Australian Government. It is this delay, cynically orchestrated by the Australian apple industry in cahoots with the political system, that has caused the boilover of grower frustration here.

Every time since 1999 that a general election has been held in Australia, the industry there has managed to lever promises that have effectively derailed the New Zealand application and forced a restart.

Last year was a prime example of this, where immediately after the election, the draft import risk analysis was withdrawn under the guise of creating a new department to deal with it.

At issue behind this trade dispute is fireblight, a bacterial disease that attacks the wood and buds of apple and pear trees, but has never been found in mature fruit.

Small quantities of the bacteria are occasionally found on the skin of mature apples, but never at levels to effect a transfer to a host plant.

The large body of scientific evidence to support this fact has been accepted three times by the WTO in the past two years. In its latest ruling, the WTO has ruled that no mitigating measures restricting the trade in mature apples is justified for reasons of fireblight.

In fact, an American scientist has calculated that the risk is a one-in-35,000-year possibility - a scientist's way of saying it can't happen.

For struggling Kiwi apple-growers a long way from traditional markets in Europe and North America, Australia represents the closest we can get to a local market.

Behind closed doors, Australian growers will disclose the real reason for opposing New Zealand entry for apples - they worry that they cannot compete with their old varieties and low production levels against our efficient and innovative industry.

But the real loser has been the Australian consumer, who is forced to buy poor quality apples with little choice of variety at some of the world's highest prices, up to seven times what a consumer here pays.

Small wonder that Australian consumption a head last year was the lowest in the Western world at 5.95kg. This compares with New Zealand's 14.5kg, Germany's 19kg and even Britain's 9kg.

But at the heart of this sorry dispute is Australia's breathtaking hypocrisy towards free trade. As leaders of the Cairns group and as vigorous negotiators of free trade agreements with such countries as New Zealand, the US, China and Thailand, Australia stands in the international marketplace as the champion of free trade.

Yet no nation is more adept at using non-tariff barriers to prevent imports nor has more trade disputes on its hands at the WTO. Australia will not be respected in international circles until it learns to walk the talk on trade.

* Peter Beaven is chief executive of Pipfruit New Zealand.