French multinational Danone has warned 441 jobs in Auckland and Otago and $1 billion in annual exports could be lost if the Government doesn’t block or secure changes to a trans-Tasman plan that would change the way infant formula can be labelled.
It is understood the issue, which will be discussed at a meeting between New Zealand and Australian food ministers on Thursday, has been high on the Government’s radar.
Food Standards Australia New Zealand (Fsanz), which is responsible for developing food standards for both Australia and New Zealand, has proposed stricter controls on the statements infant formula manufacturers can include on their packaging.
Statements on packaging are already strictly controlled to ensure there is no suggestion that formula is better than breast milk.
Manufacturers are already subject to a variety of rules that, for example, prevent them using images of infants or pictures that “idealise the use of infant formula” on their products.
But Danone’s Sydney-based director of legal compliance, Maria Venetoulis, said the new rules developed by Fsanz went further and would amount to a requirement to “white-label” infant formula in plain packaging. . .
This would be treating formula like tobacco and deny manufacturers the ability to describe their products and differentiate them from those of their competitors.
It would put New Zealand and Australian infant formula at a disadvantage and deny customers information they might need and want before the choose formula for their babies.
The Taxpayers’ Union also opposes the recommended changes:
The Taxpayers’ Union is calling on Food Safety Minister, Andrew Hoggard, to reject calls for further red tape requiring plain packaging for infant formula products.
Taxpayers’ Union Campaigns Manager, Connor Molloy, said:
“This Government, but particularly the ACT Party, was elected to cut red tape, not create even more. Plain packaging rules for infant formula would undermine intellectual property rights, stifle innovation and shift manufacturing offshore to those countries with less burdensome regulation.
“There are already laws prohibiting making false claims on packaging. More red tape simply makes it harder to do business in New Zealand for very little public benefit.
“At a time when the country’s finances are in a shambles, it would be reckless to impose further regulatory taxes that drive away businesses who contribute so much to our economy.
The message that breast is best is promoted for good reasons, but that option isn’t right for all mothers.
Some mothers need formula to supplement their own milk; some are unable to breast feed, some opt not to.
Women who are unable, or choose not, to breast feed already face pressure, and prejudice.
Further restrictions on labelling for infant formula will make that worse and treat a basic necessity for some babies like an unhealthy and very bad choice.
Baby formula isn’t tobacco, a highly addictive and unhealthy substance. It’s food, without which some babies would require wet nurses as happened in the past, or die. Wrapping it in plain packaging would be bureaucratic overreach that would deny customers information and threaten one of our biggest export industries.
The only ones to gain from this would be our competitors whose products may well be of lower quality than ours.
Ele Ludemann is a North Otago farmer and journalist, who blogs HERE - where this article was sourced.
2 comments:
NZ should just tell Fsanz, sorry we disagree and thank you for the option . NZ can argue about food because our food is first class . NZ needs the jobs and exports . Simple and practical.
It is worth reading the book MILK by Matthew Evans ( on the shelves now) to learn more about baby formula and indeed milk itself. Take it as you will.
Post a Comment
Thanks for engaging in the debate!
Because this is a public forum, we will only publish comments that are respectful and do NOT contain links to other sites. We appreciate your cooperation.