Growcom has long been an advocate for clearer Country of Origin Labelling (CoOL) laws to assist consumers to make informed choices about the food they purchase. We congratulate the Australian government for their commitment to reform in this area and appreciate the complexity of ensuring clarity for consumers without passing on undue costs to food manufacturers. Ultimately a robust food manufacturing sector is an important component of the horticultural supply chain and reforms need to be practical, implementable and equitable.
However, we do not support the proposed two-tiered system of priority (processed) and non-priority (highly processed) foods which would lead to the exemption of a whole sector of food manufacturing from CoOL requirements.
Highly processed foods include snacks such as potato chips which are an important market for Australian potatoes.
We want consumers to be able to see at once when they are buying Australian potato crisps as opposed to imports, particularly since this is one of the most popular snack foods in the country.
The rationale for a two-tired system is based on consumer research which indicates that CoOL for processed foods is consumers’ lowest priority compared with other food sectors.
However, the data in fact shows that Country of Origin was only the second most common “driver” for purchases of highly processed food and only the third most common “driver” for fresh food. Clearly, CoOL is a significant driver, regardless of the type of food.
It should also be noted that when each food category was considered separately there was only a 1 per cent difference between highly processed and fresh food where CoOL was recorded as the primary driver for purchase (17 per cent compared with 18 per cent). Many Australians clearly want the opportunity to choose which country they buy from, even when buying snacks.
We don’t believe the statistics justify exempting a whole sector of food manufacturing from CoOL laws.
Growcom is also concerned about the potential impact this ambiguous proposal might have on sectors of the fruit, vegetable and nut growing industries. We cannot accept a reform that may leave growers worse off. The benefits and costs of this reform should be applied consistently.
We also believe the proposal would send the wrong health message. If price is identified as a key driver of consumer preference across all sectors, snack foods must be included in this reform. Otherwise there is a danger of an increased price for Australian produced healthy food compared with overseas produced ‘junk’ food.
Growcom also does not support the use of the kangaroo logo for products where less than 25 per cent of the ingredients have been locally grown. The kangaroo logo is a quick indicator for many consumers and we argue that it may be potentially misleading to apply it to products below a certain threshold.
We strong support the reform of the requirements for displaying loose fresh produce under the new CoOL framework. We understand that the percentage of imported and Australian components will need to be indicated in clear labelling on bins.
As the Queensland member of Ausveg, we strongly support that organisation’s submission and would like to acknowledge the significant work they have undertaken in relation to providing input to government on this issue.
We agree with Ausveg that a public education campaign and adequate enforcement of the new requirements are vital to the success of these reforms.
