Latest news with #foodimports
Malay Mail
07-07-2025
- Business
- Malay Mail
How much onions do Malaysians eat and why is it biting into our national coffers?
KUALA LUMPUR, July 8 — Hardly any Malaysian cuisine can be cooked without onions, making the tubers one of the most expensive food items the country pays for. Federal Agricultural Marketing Authority (Fama) chairman Aminuddin Zulkipli said Malaysians consume close to 750,000 tonnes of onions a year, citing the recent Kajian Kepenggunaan Agro-Makanan Segar study. To put it visually, that's as heavy as seven fully loaded aircraft carriers! Last year, Agriculture and Food Security Minister Datuk Seri Mohamad Sabu told the Dewan Rakyat that Malaysia imported 687,000 metric tonnes of onions in 2022 — including 38,000 tonnes of shallots. Going by that figure, Mohamad Sabu said the average Malaysian eats about 1.2kg of shallots alone. 'The consumption of onions in Malaysia is growing rapidly especially after the Covid-19 pandemic. 'However, we expect the demand to grow steadily with no drastic spikes,' he told Malay Mail, when interviewed recently. Malaysia's onion imports — comprising big onions, garlic and shallots — crossed RM1 billion in 2023 and came close to RM1.5 billion in 2024. — Picture by Firdaus Latif So, how is our growing appetite for onions weighing on the national coffers? Malaysia's onion imports crossed RM1 billion in 2023 and came close to RM1.5 billion last year, according to figures published by the Department of Statistics Malaysia (DoSM). The imports comprise large onions, shallots and garlic. Aminuddin said the cost of onion imports jumped by 67 per cent in the last five years — from RM887.3 million for 479,746 metric tonnes of onions in 2020 to RM1,482.9 million in 2024. The cost of Fama's direct purchase of onions has also more than doubled between 2021 and 2024, he said. Locally-grown shallots harvested from a farm in Sepang in June 2025 on display during a promotional event at the Federal Agricultural Marketing Authority (Fama) headquarters in Selayang. — Picture by Raymond Manuel Where do our onions come from? China is the largest supplier of onions to Malaysia, accounting for 46.3 per cent of all onions imported by the country. India and Pakistan control around one-third of onions imported by Malaysia, contributing 19.2 per cent and 15.4 per cent respectively. The remaining sources include the Netherlands (five per cent), Myanmar (four per cent), Thailand (between four to five per cent) and several other countries. Why cultivating shallots locally is crucial Earlier this year, Mohamad Sabu said Malaysia could offset RM300 million — nearly a third of its overall RM1 billion onion import bill — if the country can produce 30 per cent of shallots locally. Echoing his optimism, Aminuddin said Fama will play a key role in the commercialisation phase of the shallot cultivation initiative, especially to reduce the production costs of shallots. 'Malaysia did not produce shallots locally in the past because importing was cheaper, but supply chain disruptions after the Covid-19 pandemic has made us rethink our approach. 'From Fama's perspective, we cannot just rely on conventional agriculture if we want to reduce the production cost of shallots. 'We should also consider alternative methods like organic regenerative agriculture so that we don't have to depend on pesticides too much. 'The prices of pesticides keep soaring every year, and by reducing the use of pesticides, we can surely bring down the production cost,' he said.
CNA
05-06-2025
- Business
- CNA
Singapore production of vegetables and seafood fell in 2024
SINGAPORE: The local production of vegetables and seafood continued to fall in 2024, while egg yields grew, according to a report released by the Singapore Food Agency (SFA) on Thursday (Jun 5). Vegetable production fell by about 3 per cent while the figure for seafood dropped by 14 per cent in 2024. This was partly due to the "restructuring of a few fish farms in Singapore", SFA said in its Singapore Food Statistics report. Local production of hen shell eggs, on the other hand, increased by 13 per cent in 2024 due to farm upgrades and improved operational efficiencies. In terms of the percentage of local produce consumed, Singapore's three egg farms produced 34.4 per cent of all eggs consumed in Singapore in 2024. This is up from 31.9 per cent in 2023 and 28.9 per cent in 2022. Last year, 3 per cent of vegetables consumed were grown in Singapore, down from 3.2 per cent in 2023 and 3.9 per cent in 2022. Local seafood farms contributed 6.1 per cent of total food consumption in 2024, down from 7.3 per cent in 2023 and 7.6 per cent in 2022. The number of farms also fell. In 2024, there were 153 farms on land, three fewer than the year before. There were 72 sea-based farms, a drop from the figure of 98 in 2023. DIVERSIFYING IMPORT SOURCES Singapore relies on imports for over 90 per cent of its food supply, highlighting the need to diversify its sources, said SFA. In 2024, Singapore expanded its food supply sources to 187 countries and regions, an increase from 140 about two decades ago. Portugal, for instance, was approved as a new source in 2024, and Brunei and Poland were approved as new sources for beef. Singapore can also now turn to Türkiye for poultry. 'This diversification strategy has proven crucial in mitigating risks associated with global supply disruptions, arising from various factors including disease outbreaks, climate change and geopolitical tensions,' said SFA. The top three sources for chicken have consistently been Brazil, Malaysia and the United States. FOOD SAFETY SFA also oversees food safety. In its report, the agency noted that the number of major gastroenteritis incidents caused by foodborne sources remained stable, with a slight increase from 30 cases in 2023 to 31 cases in 2024. The number of cases of foodborne illness per 100,000 population was 22.8 in 2024, pending the conclusion of a case under investigation. This is up from 21.9 per cent in 2023 and 21.1 per cent in 2022. "More than half of the foodborne illness cases involved catered food," the report noted. "As a result, SFA stepped up efforts to carry out further targeted checks on food establishments supplying catered food."
The Independent
02-06-2025
- Business
- The Independent
Starmer lifts Brexit red tape on certain imports from next month
The UK government has announced it will scrap planned border checks on fruit and vegetable imports from the European Union, preventing the measures from taking effect on July 1. This decision, attributed to what the government calls Sir Keir Starmer 's Brexit reset deal, is expected to save businesses approximately £200 million in additional supply chain costs, according to the produce sector. The move has been welcomed by industry stakeholders who had voiced concerns over the potential financial burden of the proposed controls. Bosses had warned that this could add to inflation, put pressure on food supply chains and threaten the future of businesses. The new SPS (sanitary and phytosanitary) deal with the EU will eliminate routine border checks for food exports and imports on certain products. The Government said impending checks on 'medium-risk' fruit and vegetables, such as tomatoes, grapes, plums, cherries, peaches and peppers, will now not be introduced. The latest relaxation in trade rules will take place until January 31 2027 as a 'contingency measure', according to officials. Biosecurity minister Baroness Hayman said: 'This Government's EU deal will make food cheaper, slash bureaucracy and remove cumbersome border controls for businesses. 'A strengthened, forward-looking partnership with the European Union will deliver for working people as part of our plan for change.' It is the fourth time the border check plans have been pushed back, with the proposals previously set to come into force in January. The checks on fruit and vegetables were the latest phase of the Government's Border Target Operating Model which introduced checks on animal and plant products last year.
The Guardian
21-05-2025
- Business
- The Guardian
Brexit food control post at Portsmouth ‘may have to be demolished', says port director
A £25m post-Brexit border control post in Portsmouth may have to be demolished if the UK government's deal with the EU removes the need for health and veterinary checks on food imports, according to the port's director. Mike Sellers had already spoken out last year about how more than half of the site would never be used because planned checks on EU food and plant products had been pared back since it was designed, leading to the building being called a 'white elephant'. The hi-tech facility at the UK's second busiest cross-Channel terminal was one of more than 100 border control posts (BCPs) around the country built to government specifications to handle post-Brexit checks on imports subject to sanitary and phytosanitary checks, such as meat, fish, dairy products, fruit and vegetables. Under Keir Starmer's deal with the EU announced on Monday, some routine checks on animal and plant products would be scrapped completely. 'Anything that would smooth the movement of trade as well as passengers around the port is welcomed, although the devil is in the detail,' said Sellers. 'Based on Monday's announcement and the information that has been provided, we believe that then negates the need for the border control post,' he added, leaving it with two costly choices. Sellers said the port's owner, Portsmouth city council, could either 'repurpose the facility and see whether we can get another use out of it, or demolish it to give us some more operational land'. Boasting 14 lorry bays, Portsmouth's 8,000 sq metre (86,000 sq ft) border site was designed to allow inspection of low- and high-risk goods in air-lock quarantine zones to prevent cross-contamination. However, it has been heavily underused since it began operating in April last year, after the previous Conservative government's changes to its post-Brexit import regime, known as the border target operating model, which significantly reduced the number of tests required. An average of three checks have been carried out each day at Portsmouth's BCP in the 12 months since it began operating, Sellers said, compared with the 80 a day for which it was built. It and other ports have also been unable to earn the expected amount of money from levying charges on importers for the goods checks. Portsmouth, along with 40 other ports, received £200m in government funding for the new control posts. However, the port infrastructure fund was oversubscribed, meaning the ports themselves had to spend an estimated £120m to cover the remaining building costs. Sellers' port received £17.1m from the fund after applying for £32m, forcing the council to take out a loan to cover the shortfall. Sign up to Business Today Get set for the working day – we'll point you to all the business news and analysis you need every morning after newsletter promotion The British Ports Association (BPA) has welcomed the new deal between the UK and the EU, but is reiterating its call for compensation for ports that were forced to build now-redundant border infrastructure. 'The sector is out of pocket by £120m in infrastructure costs and ongoing costs,' said Richard Ballantyne, the industry body's chief executive. 'It is very expensive to repurpose and modify the border facilities, and in some cases it will be more cost-effective to demolish them. We are left in a precarious situation of not knowing what to do, but ultimately the cost will need to be passed on as port operations can't continue taking a hit.' The BPA estimates that the running costs for a larger BCP, such as Portsmouth, with about 15 lorry bays will be £200,000 a year, to cover energy, cleaning, insurance and business rates. Smaller BCPs may have running costs of about £100,000 a year. Portsmouth is backing the BPA's call for compensation, and said the local authority had been left about £6m out of pocket. 'We have been left with this huge white elephant,' said Sellers. 'We are not blessed with a lot of operational land, and this took up acres of land and the opportunity cost around that. We were unable to handle some of the potential new business that could have come through Portsmouth.'
