Australian Food Sovereignty Alliance

Fair food for all Australians

  • About
    • History
      • Origins of AFSA by Russ Grayson
    • Our Team
      • Current National Committee
      • Past committees
    • Governance
    • President’s report
    • International
    • Press
      • In the News
      • Media Releases
    • Get in touch
  • Farmers
    • Farming on Other People’s Land
    • Community Supported Agriculture
    • Workers’ Rights
  • Legal Defence Fund
    • Our Services
    • Who we support
    • Past efforts
    • Campaigns
    • Our Vision
  • Peoples’ Food Plan
  • CSA
  • Events
    • Fair Food Week
    • Food Sovereignty Convergence 15-24 Oct 2020
      • Watch: Food Sovereignty Convergence 2020
    • AFSA Solidarity Economy Sessions
      • Why solidarity economies?
      • What is a solidarity economy?
  • Submissions
  • Join Us
    • Join Us
    • AFSA Members’ Sesssions
  • Buy the Book!
    • Farming Democracy
    • Cart

Countering industrial orthodoxy

May 5, 2015 by Alana Mann

Story by Tammi Jonas, AFSA President, May 2015

farm-to-consumerOn Monday the 27th of April, over 40 Australian farmers, chefs, providores and assorted supporters, journalists and academics came together to discuss the potential for an Australian organisation similar to the American Farm to Consumer Defence Fund.

logo_textTogether with the support of Lisa Heenan and Darren Doherty of Regrarians and Guy and Liz Grossi, AFSA welcomed Joel Salatin of Polyface fame to address the group on the topic of ‘A Fair & Regenerative Food System’. Over the course of a very full day punctuated by some very delicious food graciously provided by the Grossis, we worked through the issues as we see them and what Australian growers and eaters can do about them.

Joel’s talk was (predictably) equal parts inspiring and entertaining. He commenced with a quick history of the industrialization of agriculture, and how with industrialization came long supply chains and decreasing transparency. As industrialization led to a fear of what we couldn’t see, we ended up with an industrial food regulation system.

Joel then gave us some trademark pearls of wisdom:

  • industrial orthodoxy is scale prejudicial – it’s easy to scale up, but can’t scale down
  • industrial orthodoxy is extremely subjective – one day the regulators expect your boning room to be blue, the next pink, the next green (and I’ll add that some of them might be colourblind)
  • industrial orthodoxy is adversarial – it sets regulators and regulated up as adversaries from the outset
  • industrial orthodoxy is efficiency-prejudiced – eg. increased throughput at an abattoir is cause for celebration, instead of increased welfare at that same abattoir
  • industrial orthodoxy doesn’t inform, it just codifies.

Joel asked the provocative question, “what will our children think of the current orthodoxy that safe food is sterile?”

This culture of sterility says:

  • Coca Cola is safe but raw milk is dangerous;
  • spreadable cheese product is safe but Roquefort is dangerous; and
  • petroleum-based fertilizer is safe but compost is dangerous.

While some of us are engaged in re-building a food system outside of contemporary industrial orthodoxies, Joel points out that there are new areas of conflict ahead. The re-zoning and claiming of agricultural land for urban development is just one planning problem we face, and it’s a big one. He’s also concerned about insurance policies written for an industrial society rather than your small, local farmer who just needs a farm hand, and the restrictions on housing more than one nuclear family when regenerative farming takes many hands – we need ‘more eyes per acre’, not less.

While some of the issues Joel raised may be more specific to the United States, his remedies resonate. First and foremost, we need food sovereignty laws to establish the people’s right to collectively determine our own food and agriculture systems.

Such laws could, as Wyoming has recently done, exempt all direct producer to consumer transactions from the usual regulatory framework (meat and dairy are excluded). Or they could be exempt based on numerical scale – this sort of exemption already exists in many examples of legislation. Exemptions could be based on location, description, empirical testing, or, Joel suggests, complete circumvention.

In the US, they have the Farm to Consumer Legal Defence Fund, which was established in the mid-2000s to protect people’s right to sell or acquire the food of their choice, and to protect against harassment by regulating authorities. The Fund operates a 24/7 hotline for producers to ring for immediate advice when the ‘food police’ roll up their driveway.

Joel says he’s used it three times, and the last time was when authorities destroyed some of his eggs in a restaurant for not being stamped – the chef rang Joel, who rang the hotline, who rang the authority, who withdrew their claim against Joel within 24 hours. As Joel says, if he’d been left on his own to fight the regulator, he’d still be trying.

Joel finished off by asking how can we embrace live food again? The current system has centralized risk and removed responsibility and with it, choice. What we need to do is de-centralise risk and distribute responsibility.

The rest of the day was spent working through the issues producers, providores, chefs and eaters are facing in our attempts to grow, buy and eat the food of our choice, and commencing the discussion of what an organization like the Farm to Consumer Legal Defence Fund in Australia might look like.

Do we need a hotline? Templates to assist producers in complying with regulations? Templates to assist council in understanding how they can support flourishing local food economies? Advocacy for legal reform?

We’re interested in your views.

If you want to learn more or support our work with the Regrarians and the Grossis to establish an organization like America’s Farm to Consumer Legal Defence Fund, drop us a line at admin@afsa.org.au.au. Or even better, join AFSA today – every voice makes us stronger and helps us build a fair food future for Australia.

Filed Under: Legal Defence Fund Tagged With: American Farm to Consumer Defence Fund, food safety, regulation

Support Food Sovereignty

Join or renew your AFSA membership today!

Search

Recent Posts

  • Can agriculture stop COVID-21, -22, and -23? Yes, but not by greenwashing agribusiness
  • 2020 National Committee Report
  • Nominations to the AFSA National Committee for 2020-2021
  • Food Sovereignty Convergence 2020 Schedule
  • AFSA’s Response to the ACCC’s Perishable Agricultural Goods Inquiry

Read more about…

Latest submissions

FSANZ proposes ‘licence to sell lettuce’ – AFSA says NO

On 3 May 2019, Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) released an information paper on its proposed approach to a review of food safety standards in the Food Standards Code (the Review). The intention is to create a consistent and up-to-date approach to food safety management with regard to so-called “high-risk horticulture,” which includes a […]

NSW Fresh Food Pricing Parliamentary Inquiry Hearing

On Friday 22 June 2018, AFSA attended the NSW Fresh Food Pricing Parliamentary Inquiry Hearing at Parliament House in Sydney. AFSA was selected and recognised as a key stakeholder in the food system by the parliamentary members in this Upper House inquiry. Tammi Jonas, president of AFSA, and our paralegal Sarah de Wit were welcomed […]

Response to the Proposed Draft Australian Animal Welfare Standards and Guidelines for Poultry

View AFSA’s entire submission here.  The current review of the Model Code of Practice for the Welfare of Animals – Domestic Poultry offers the first opportunity in 15 years to improve the minimum welfare standards for domestic poultry in Australia. It provides the chance to modify Australian standards to reflect current animal welfare science and […]

Poultry Welfare Reforms Fact Sheet

The Codes for animal welfare for poultry are being reviewed for the first time in over 15 years. The result will be one Australia-wide Code on animal welfare for poultry. Two main documents, along with an independent Farmed Bird Science Welfare Review and many supporting papers, have been released for public comment: The Draft Standards […]

Collective action in support of small-scale, regenerative farmers

In support of small-scale, regenerative farmers in Victoria, the following organisations have submitted responses to the Victorian Government’s Planning for Sustainable Animal Industries Draft Planning Provisions. Australian Food Sovereignty Alliance Victorian Farmers Market Association Melbourne Farmers Market Association Regenerative​ ​Agriculture​ ​Industry​ ​Group​ City of Whittlesea

Newsletter

  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter
  • YouTube

Become a member

Join or renew

Already a member?

Login

Update membership details

Recent posts

  • Can agriculture stop COVID-21, -22, and -23? Yes, but not by greenwashing agribusiness December 15, 2020
  • 2020 National Committee Report November 3, 2020
  • Nominations to the AFSA National Committee for 2020-2021 October 23, 2020
  • Food Sovereignty Convergence 2020 Schedule October 15, 2020
  • AFSA’s Response to the ACCC’s Perishable Agricultural Goods Inquiry October 13, 2020

Copyright © 2021 · Outreach Pro on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in