Changes in store for labels

Green Party MP Sue Kedgley, welcomed the report. Photo / Fotopress

Compulsory warnings on alcohol, information about GE ingredients on fast food chain menus and easy-to-understand ingredient lists.

These are among sweeping recommendations from a trans-tasman review of food labelling that could revolutionise the way we shop in the supermarket - and beyond.

The 61-point report, commissioned by the Australia and New Zealand Food Regulation Ministerial Council, was compiled over a year by a panel of health, nutrition and consumer behaviour experts.

More than 7000 submissions from the food industry, health sector and general public on both sides of the Tasman were considered before the final version was released last month.

Food Regulation Ministerial Council chairwoman Catherine King said the document addressed issues that have challenged governments around the world.

She said issues the review aimed to address included the "fundamental question" of whether "everything we consume is being accurately, clearly and sufficiently labelled".

New Zealand's Food Safety Authority, part of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, will consider the review over the next 10 months.

A spokesman said Food Safety Minister Kate Wilkinson would make a decision on which recommendations to implement in December.

Key recommendations include:

Traffic light symbols that rate a product's levels of saturated fats, sugar and salt, and mandatory labelling on products from caged animals.

Making nutritional information "clear and comprehensible" with simple words to identify additives, colours and flavours - and a minimum typeface size so the information is not lost in the small print.

Doing away with "per serve" values, to close a loophole that allows manufacturers to understate the size of a typical serving size.

Fast food chains were also targeted, with recommendations that information about energy content and genetically engineered ingredients be listed on menu boards.

The panel also called for warning messages about the risks of drinking while pregnant to be plastered on alcohol products, and generic alcohol warning labels as part of a wider public health campaign.

Green Party MP Sue Kedgley, a long-time campaigner for improved labelling, welcomed the report and called current laws "pathetic".

"The consumer should have the right to know what's in the food they eat. It's fundamental to our health and wellbeing and there are huge ethical choices to make around food."

Fight the Obesity Epidemic spokeswoman Dr Robyn Toomath said she expected the food industry to pour huge amounts of money into lobbying against the recommendations before Wilkinson makes a decision.

"We have zero funds to compete with the resources of the industry," Toomath said.

But she said labelling alone will not improve the health of New Zealanders.

"It's a relatively weak tool. That's why the Government needs to adopt a comprehensive set of policies, including removing the promotion of junk food and making healthy options more affordable," she said.

Kedgley was also concerned that the Government would falter under industry pressure.

"MAF is leading a departmental review into the recommendations and consulting with the industry. That immediately had my alarm bells ringing; their whole lens for looking at the report is through the food industry," she said.

"Consumers need to rally to say they want these changes and we don't want them undermined."

New Zealand and Australia have a joint approach to regulating the food industry, but either country can opt out of decisions.

This was the case with country-of-origin labelling, made mandatory in Australia but not by the New Zealand Government.

"It's a deplorable gap," said Kedgely. "Our Government says it conflicts with our fair trade agenda. They want to be able to sell our product overseas. They're putting trade interests above consumer interests.

Wilkinson's spokesman said there had to be "sound evidence when contemplating any sort of intervention, particularly where information doesn't relate to food safety or public health".

Dietician and Nutrition Foundation spokeswoman Sarah Hanarhan said the report was a step in the right direction but was not convinced labelling could change consumer behaviour.

AUT consumer behaviour specialist Professor Roger Marshall said warnings on alcohol products had little effect on consumption: "Most ... people who still smoke or drink know the risks and have already made a decision to either take notice and moderate their behaviour or to ignore them."