Food Labelling Forum summary report - 29 May 2002

Mrs Ann Hemingway

UK Board Member, Food Standards Agency, Chair of Advisory Committee for Wales

The Food Standards Agency was established as a UK-wide non-Ministerial Government Department in April 2000. The Agency has an independent Board and is accountable to Parliament and the devolved authorities, including the Welsh Assembly Government, through Health Ministers. The Food Standards Agency has publicly committed itself to three core values:

• Putting the consumer first
• Being open and accessible
• Being an independent voice

One way of publicly demonstrating our commitment to those values is to host events such as this.

The public needs, and expects, to be given clear and reliable information about the food they eat. One of the most important sources of information is the food label. As well as helping us to choose value for money products, reading the food labels can give us information on where food comes from; the facts behind claims; facts to help us follow advice on healthy eating; help in avoiding food poisoning and freedom to avoid ingredients which we don't want or shouldn't eat. That, of course, can be vital to consumers who suffer from severe allergic reactions or are on restricted diets.

The Food Standards Agency Consumer Attitudes Survey in Wales showed that in 2001, 54% of consumers regularly check food labels, but a quarter of these consumers (27%) found them difficult to understand. It is information such as this that has led the Food Standards Agency and the Board to identify a need for better food labelling as one of its key priorities.

This is the fourth Food Labelling Forum, previous workshops have been held in London and Stirling, Scotland. Each event has attracted between 100 and 200 people, representing public interest organisations, local councils, food manufacturers, supermarkets and consumer groups as well as members of the public. It has been a valuable sounding board and an opportunity for participants to ask us questions, feed in their views and contribute directly to policy making. Reports of all previous Forums are available.

Update of the Food Labelling Action Plan

The Agency has a strong commitment to improving food choice and improved labelling is a key part of that agenda.

Rosemary Hignett, Head of Branch A, Food Labelling and Standards Division

Action Plan Objectives

The principal objectives of the Food Labelling Action Plan are:

• Press for transparent EU legislation focused on consumer needs
• Define and promote best practice nationally by working with stakeholders and influence at EU level.
• Provide clear advice on use of labels
• A strategic plan firmly based on public health needs, consumer research findings and public consultation
• Regular Open Forums as an integral part of the action plan to discuss progress and hear views and ideas of stakeholders and everyone who has an interest.

EU Legislation

The Agency's key objectives are to secure:

• Comprehensive ingredient listing
• Nutrition facts on all foods in a format that is easier to use for consumers
• Statutory controls on nutrition and health claims due to increase in use of these claims
• Clearer country of origin information
• Practical, informative GM labelling

Best practice

Issues that concern the public are:

• Clear labels high on consumer priority list
• Perceived over-use of term 'May contain nuts'
• Terms like fresh, traditional, home-made etc should only be used when they mean something – Agency will produce advice on use of these terms
• More information in catering establishments and on loose foods
• Promotion of foods to children – FSA research review underway
• Encouraging industry to exploit off-label information, especially on production systems particularly amongst children

Advice and education

Some examples of what the Agency is doing to promote better information and education:

• A new FSA website containing plenty of advice on use of labels
• Relaunch of leaflets
  • distinction between 'use by' and 'best before' dates
  • how to use nutrition panel on food
  • what claims on foods mean
• food issues in schools

Ingredient listing

Consumers very concerned especially where people have allergies

• Proposal under discussion in Brussels
  • removes all ingredient listing exemptions for 10 major allergens
  • removes compound ingredient exemption (so, for example, the ingredients in the sausage on a pizza would have to be declared)
  • some derogations, e.g. sauces used at less than 5%

Major allergens

• cereals containing gluten
• crustaceans
• eggs
• fish
• peanuts
• sulphite at more than 10mg/kg
• nuts
• sesame seeds
• soybeans
• milk

Next steps

• discussion in European Parliament in June
• continuing discussions between Member States
• adoption by end 2002
• fully in force by end 2004

Country of Origin labelling

We know from consumer research that people want more information and many don’t trust the information they read on the label

• Consultation on new draft FSA guidance completed
• This guidance interprets legislation on false and misleading labelling
• It proposes best practice advice on origin labelling
  • products
  • ingredients
  • location and form of declaration

Avoiding misleading labelling
Two key messages in draft guidance

• Don't allow information on the place of processing to mislead as to the origin of ingredients. For example
  • Bacon made in Britain from Danish pork could not be described as 'British bacon', but should be described as 'Danish bacon cured in Britain'
  • Consumers expect meat labelled
    • 'produce of...', 'product of...'
    • 'produced in...', 'origin...',
    • 'British', 'Scottish', 'Welsh' etc
  • to have been born, reared and slaughtered in that country
  • Labels on meat from animals with more complicated histories will need to make this clear

Best practice

• We recommend
  • Product origin information be given whenever practicable. This information is particularly helpful for primary products like meat, fruit and simple 'single ingredient' products like butter
  • Ingredient origin information be given for those ingredients known to be of most interest to consumers. Research shows that these are meat ingredients, with dairy produce also scoring highly

Next steps

• Publish formal FSA advice based on responses to consultations or at open forum
• Monitor take up
• Continue to take the lead internationally in lobbying for new EU rules. Gather support from all Member States for our stance on origin labelling

Clearer labels

• Expert Taskforce set up including representatives from RNIB and Plain English Campaign
• Findings published March 2002
• Consultation on draft FSA advice closed on 7 June 2002 based on task force's recommendations
• Consumers find it hard to find information
  • Consistency and grouping
• Need perfect vision to read text
  • Need advice/rules on print size and clarity
• Consumers believe they need science degree to understand
  • Ingredient lists
  • Nutrition panel - these are the areas consumers have most difficulty with

• Task force advice to group key facts:
  • name of the food
  • net weight or volume
  • instructions for storage/use
  • date mark
  • nutrition information
  • ingredients list
  • customer careline information

Recommendations for print size, colour and type:

• Minimum font size 10pt wherever possible, with 8pt as the absolute minimum
• Use of simple sans serif fonts, and those with a good 'X' height
• Avoid use of italics and overuse of capitals
• Use black type on a white background. Alternatively ensure that there is a high tonal contrast between the colour used for the type and that used for its background

Ingredient lists

• Ahead of any changes to the law:
  • Always include major allergens
  • Use simple language, such as 'milk protein' instead of 'casein'
  • Highlight allergens in a separate 'contains' box next to ingredients list
  • List ingredients alphabetically rather than in descending order of weight
  • List additives by E number
  • Break out ingredients of compound ingredients

Next steps

• Following close of consultation issue formal FSA advice
• Consumer testing new nutrition panels – report progress at next forum meeting

Question and Answer Session, Chaired by Grant Meekings

Grant Meekings opened up the session by welcoming the opportunity for participants to exercise their right to ask questions in the Welsh language .

He reiterated the point that improving labelling was a major priority for the Agency . The Agency recognised that consumers needed clear and accurate information so that they could make informed choices. Grant invited questions that sought to elucidate any aspects of the labelling plan and welcomed opinions on any of the issues raised earlier by Rosemary.

Labelling of imported meat

There were strong feelings expressed by a number of stakeholders about misleading country of origin labelling, particularly of meat. Rosemary Hignett explained that the first step was to get the law right . Existing legislation was already in place to deal with misleading labelling , supported by Agency advice. There was some evidence that supermarkets were taking the Agency's advice on board - the next step would be to have that enshrined in legislation.

The Agency is pressing for country of origin labelling at an international level in CODEX given that CODEX rules are reference points for WTO disputes. On the issue of traceability, the ability to enforce and validate any legislation rules would be seen as critical . A requirement for all food businesses to keep records of who they bought from and who they sell on to will become mandatory under a new general European food regulation which comes into effect in 2003.

DNA traceability particularly of meat was suggested as a reliable leading -edge technique . Stakeholders heard that DNA detection techniques had been successfully deployed in a recent FSA survey of added water in meat products . Grant Meekings confirmed the Agency was sponsoring research in support of new surveillance methods.

Nutrition labelling

A plea for the declaration of sugar on food labels particularly in relation to oral health was made . The fact that sugar was often masked by the declaration 'carbohydrate' on a label was not considered helpful in this regard. The FSA was pressing for a change in the law to require the declaration of sugar on all foods. The Agency was also in the process of designing a performance test for a potential new nutrition panel and therefore the sugar declaration issue would be considered for reflection in the performance test. It was reported that the causal link between poor oral health and diet had been reflected in the nutrition strategy for Wales consultation document .

Labelling of Alcoholic Drinks

FSA would like to see alcoholic drinks treated in exactly the same manner as any other food and will be pressing for changes in EU law to achieve this. It was clarified that the proposal coming before the EP shortly, which would require the presence of major allergens to be declared on all products , will also extend to alcoholic drinks .

GM Labelling

Sue Hattersley, Novel Foods Division

Existing GM Labelling Provisions

GM labelling has to be honest and capable of being enforced. Current EC labelling requirements are triggered when novel DNA or protein is present in the final food.

• Applies to food ingredients, food additives and flavourings
• Four separate European Regulations that cover GM food labelling (1997-2000)
• UK has introduced enforcement provisions consolidated in one set of domestic regulations
• Applies to foods sold to final consumer or caterer
• No current requirement for traceability in the supply chain

Why change current GM labelling rules?
Previous Commission commitments

• negative list
• GM free rules
• additive threshold to comply with 1% rule

Impasse regarding GMO and novel food approvals – Novel Food Regulations 1997

• no GM approvals for food use since introduction of NFR
• six Member States now joined by Belgium in moratorium
• 13 dossiers awaiting approval

Consumer concerns regarding current rules. Confusion regarding 'GM free'

Definition of Commission Proposals
Commission issued two proposals in July 2001

• Traceability and Labelling of GMOs and food and feed products derived from GMOs
  • this proposal is being handled by DEFRA
  • does not contain the labelling rules
• GM Food and Feed
  • this proposal is being handled by FSA
  • does contain the labelling rules

Labelling Options, Traceability and Labelling Proposal

• Rules for traceability of GMOs and food and feed products derived from them
• Unique identifiers
• Record keeping
• Sampling and detection
• Enforcement

GM Food and Feed Proposal

• Covers applications and authorisation procedures through European Food Safety Authority
• Extends labelling requirements to animal feed
• Post marketing monitoring
• Threshold for non-EU approved material
• Extends labelling to food produced from GMOs but not containing novel GM ingredients

Forming the UK position

• FSA Consultation and Discussion on proposals
  • 2 stakeholder meetings
  • formal written consultation
  • FSA Open Board meeting
• Discussion with DEFRA and other Government Departments, including Devolved Administration
• FSA commissioned economic research looking at the costs of different labelling schemes

The FSA Board met in September 2001, and were of the view that:

• They were committed to providing consumers with real choices about GM and meaningful information
• They were not convinced that Commissions proposal could be delivered for consumers in a way that could be enforced, is practical and affordable
• Proposed that starting point for EU negotiations should be the current rules based on detectable DNA or protein supplemented with the introduction of a ‘GM free' provision

UK Negotiating Approach

• EU approach must be consistent, proportionate and enforceable
• Believe labelling products that contain no novel DNA or protein is unworkable
• Consumer choice would be enhanced by a ‘GM-free’ labelling scheme
• Should keep 1% threshold under review

Next steps

• Government response to the House of Lords enquiry
• House of Commons scrutiny debate
• Public debate to begin
• European Parliament 1st reading likely to be July
• FSA Stakeholder meeting planned September 2002

Negotiations in Brussels are still at an early stage:

• Food and Feed – Several Member States are still considering their position
• Traceability and Labelling – no meetings under Spanish Presidency
• EP public debate in April on both proposals
• EP 1st reading in July on both proposals

Parliamentary Scrutiny

• House of Lords – evidence given from:
  • European Scrutiny Sub Committee D
  • Consumers Association, BRC, FDF
  • FSA, DEFRA, FoE, USA
• report published 23/05/2002

House of Lords recommendations

• Consumers have the right to choose
• Labelling information to be consistent and meaningful
• Generally supportive of FSA position that Commission proposals are unworkable particularly regarding products traded globally

House of Lords practical views

• Thresholds
  • approved
  • non-approved
• EU approvals moratorium
• Bulk commodity imports
• Different concerns in different parts of the world
• Label size

House of Lords Practical Suggestions

• Terminology – Non-GM/GM-free – should mean total absence of GM, including processing aids from GM sources
• Develop existing IP & assurance schemes
• Better information for consumers

Other Parliamentary scrutiny

• House of Commons
  • DEFRA GMO Sub Committee
  • evidence from AEBC, DEFRA likely to recommend debate shortly

GM Soya in UK bakery products

• FSA study to assess cutting edge GM detection techniques
• 203 samples – 15% had trace levels of GM – 3 were above 1%
• Soya ingredient content 0.3% of final bakery product – 1% GM amounts to 0.003%
• Although IP non-GM soya had been used – possible contamination from soya beans getting to wheat

1st GM Labelling prosecution

• Warwickshire Trading Standards Office, 12 March 2002
• Soya mince product contained 50% GM soya
• Offence under Regulation 7(a) of GM and Novel Foods (Labelling) England Regulations 2000

Suggestions for Discussions at open forum & stakeholder meetings

• What are the key issues in relation to the approval and labelling of GM foods?
• What are the constraints on the enforceability of the labelling provisions in the commission proposals?
• What is the most meaningful term to describe foods and food ingredients that are not GM?

Question and Answer Session - Definition of GM free and Non-GM

A number of foods carry 'GM free' labels and it is not clear to consumers what is meant precisely by that term. Opinion appears to be divided between those who think it means free of the technology and others who think it means free of novel DNA /protein. 'Non -GM' on the other hand is construed by some to mean not involving the deliberate use of GM technology. To arrive at a term that is meaningful to industry and consumers alike is a key issue for the Government.

In answer to a specific question on developing detection technology methods it was noted that the Agency was developing its work in this area.

GM labelling - US and European perspectives

The US approach labelling from a safety perspective whereas Europeans demand both safety and consumer choice to be addressed on labels. The US is threatening to take action if legislation is enforced in Europe that appears to contravene WTO rules.

A lengthy debate followed on the issue of GMOs generally and it was evident that there was confusion in the minds of the public in relation to the separate issues of GM food and environment safety.

Given the apparent public confusion surrounding the whole issue, FSA is currently developing guidance for consumers on GM technology and food and a wider a public debate is planned for later in the year.

Wales Food & Agriculture Standards Panel

An Enforcers Perspective

Julie Layton
Senior Trading Standards Officer
Pembrokeshire County Council

Ron Ennion
Public Analyst
Eurofins Scientific

Julie Layton Senior Trading Standards Officer and Ron Ennion Eurofins Scientist represented the views of the Wales Food and Agricultural Standards Panel on the enforcement of the law.

The Wales Food and Agricultural Standards Panel is a Committee under the auspices of the Society of Directors of Public Protection Wales. Members include Trading Standards officers, Public Analysts, the Welsh Local Government Association, LACORS and a representative from FSA Wales . The panel's role is a co-ordinating one amongst Trading Standards departments, enabling the spread of best practice and consistency of standards in relation to food and agricultural issues and through commenting on draft legislation and offering opinion on technical issues.

Enforcement of food labelling laws is often regarded as a difficult area for local authorities. One significant problem related to the provenance of the food and the speaker expressed concern over the disproportionate area of label given over to the marketing of the product rather than the statutory labelling requirements. Whilst the work of the Task Force on Label Clarity initiated by the Agency was commended, its recommendations were considered disappointing in this regard.

Some examples of misleading labels were then shared with delegates e.g. the ingredients list of a supermarket brand of pate - marketed as Chicken liver pate with brandy - revealed in accordance with QUID rules that the presence of 40% pork fat and 33 % chicken liver. There were a number of other similar examples shared with delegates.

Question and Answer Session, Clear labelling

Points continued in discussion regarding clarity of labelling and specifically the balance to be struck between the space used for consumer information and that used for promotional material and adverts. The Task Force on Label Clarity that was established by the Agency as part of the Food Labelling Action Plan has consulted on draft advice and this includes a suggestion that a larger area of label could be given over to the statutory information at the expense of the marketing information. The Agency believes that the promotion of food manufacturer's products should not take precedence over the supply of essential information in a form that consumers can easily read and understand.

Local Authority funding

There were several points from enforcers regarding lack of resources available to local authorities and the prohibitive costs of taking legal action against the large multinational food businesses. The Agency understands the amount of legislation that TSOs have to grapple with and there was no practical alternative consolidation exercise that might apply .

Monitoring of Guidance

A question was raised about the extent to which the Agency would be monitoring the take up of its advice to industry in order to track whether it was being followed . The Agency plans to carry out surveys in this regard but unless advice is underpinned by specific legislation then, in the case of 'best practice' it is rather more an issue of choice for industry rather than a matter of law.

Implementation of legislation in Wales

An observation was made by a Trading Standards Officer that since devolution and the establishment of the Agency she had come across examples of food law being implemented in Wales later than in other parts of the UK. Ann Hemingway acknowledged that there had some problems, on both the part of the Assembly and the Agency, and that this, coupled with issues such as the Welsh language dimension or last minute UK drafting changes, had resulted in delays in implementation of some pieces of legislation in Wales. There had been improvements of late and every effort was being made to ensure consistency across the whole of the UK.

Close

Ann Hemingway thanked the speakers and delegates for contributing
to a very successful event.

The next Food labelling Forum will be on 6 December in London