Additional Comments by Nick
Xenophon
Independent Senator for South
Australia
1.1
Enough is enough. In their current form Australia's food labelling laws –
particularly as they relate to country of origin labelling – are woeful. They
result in anomalies such as imported orange concentrate to be labelled 'Made in
Australia' if it is reconstituted here. Australian consumers, and for that
matter Australian producers, deserve far better.
1.2
Senator Milne's Competition and Consumer Amendment (Australian Food
Labelling) Bill 2012 (No. 2) was preceded by a bill I introduced with Nationals
Senator Barnaby Joyce and then-Greens Leader, Senator Bob Brown in 2009. This
Bill is a further attempt at reforming country of origin labelling as we know
it.
1.3 Consistent with recommendation 41 of the 2011
report Labelling Logic by Dr Neal Blewett AC (commonly referred to
as the Blewett Review), this bill sought to amend the Competition and
Consumer Act 2010 to create a specific section that deals solely with
country of origin claims regarding food. The bill also sought to provide for
country of origin labelling to be dependent on the ingoing weight of
ingredients and components (excluding water) rather than on where processing
and packaging took place.
1.4 It should be noted that the Blewett Review was
criticised by many including the writer, as not going far enough in terms of country
of origin food labelling reform. However, it was still a material improvement on
the current laws where the 51 per cent substantial transformation rule can
also mean that a meat pie could be labelled ‘Made in Australia’ even though the
meat could be fully imported (because other ingredients are Australian and the
processing and packaging takes place here). Notwithstanding the overly cautious
approach of the Blewett Review, the Government’s response was pathetic. It
failed to recommend any substantial changes to food labelling laws. There has
been a substantial lack of political will on the part of the Government to
reform this crucial issue of consumer choice and information,
1.5 The Committee has acknowledged that while some
concerns were raised regarding specific provisions of the bill, there was
widespread support for the intention of the bill. Concerns raised included the
absence of a definition of 'substantially transformed' and a lack of distinction
between packaged and non‑packaged foods which could lead to loopholes
allowing imported fresh food to be sold as Australian if it is processed and
sold in packages here. Concerns were also raised that the bill may affect
Australia's manufacturing sector negatively.
1.6 In order to address these concerns the Committee
has made a number of recommendations, such as recommending that the Government
should consider developing a more effective definition of 'substantially
transformed'. I fully support the Committee’s recommendations in that respect.
1.7 However, while the current bill may have a number
of technical shortcomings, these could be overcome with appropriate political
will. Therefore this should not be seen as an opportunity for the Federal
Government to further delay much needed reform of Australian country of origin
labelling laws, particularly given the Federal Government's poor track record
when it comes to responding to previous food labelling reviews.
1.8 For instance, I believe the Federal Government's
response to the Blewett Review was a win for multinational, foreign-owned
companies who can export their products to Australia where unsuspecting
consumers purchase them, believing they are supporting Australian producers. By
ignoring the recommendations relating to country of origin claims, the Federal
Government is effectively allowing Australian consumers to continue to be
misled.
1.9 The urgency of country of origin food labelling
reform needs to also be considered with the Closer Economic Relationship with
New Zealand.
1.10 Arising out of a recent hearing of this Committee
into biosecurity matters, AusVeg – the peak industry body of vegetable
producers – issued the attached media release. The AusVeg release highlights a
glaring loophole in our laws in that a vegetable from a third country could be
packaged in New Zealand and labelled as a 'Product of New Zealand'. The clear
definition of 'Product of Australia' is that the produce was grown and
processed in Australia. The AusVeg revelations raise serious questions over the
Closer Economic Relationship with New Zealand and the ability of consumers to
be misinformed. This is another area of food labelling laws that must be dealt
with urgently.
Recommendation 1
1.11
The bill be passed with significant and appropriate amendments,
because of the imperative that consumers not be misled as they are under
current food labelling laws.
Senator Nick Xenophon
Independent Senator for South Australia
Media release (PDF 171KB)
Navigation: Previous Page | Contents | Next Page