Tim Hammond (Perth, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Consumer Affairs) Share this | Hansard source

I also rise to support the Imported Food Control Amendment Bill 2017, in the context that, at the end of the day, food safety is consumer safety. While food safety is not managed with the oversight of the ACCC or the ACL, the Australian Consumer Law, consumers of food—Australian and imported, fresh and processed—obviously want to know that it is safe to eat. It is appropriate that we go to the most recent example that is in the forefront of most consumers' minds when it comes to food. That relates to frozen berries and the hepatitis A scandal in 2015. At the time of these events back in 2015, the member for New England, who was in control of the portfolio, said that the answer to these dilemmas was country-of-origin labelling reform. We welcome the COOL reform and acknowledge the important role that labelling plays in empowering consumers to make choices in the supermarket aisle that are right for them and their families. That is why we supported the competition and consumer amendment country-of-origin labelling legislation when it came to this place shortly after I was appointed to my current role with responsibilities for consumer affairs matters in 2016.

This is not rocket science. Consumers simply want clear, quick, easy to find, easy to understand information about the origin of the products they seek to purchase. Fundamentally, consumers just want to be informed about what it is they're buying, where it's from and what's in it. These, after all, are not unreasonable requests from consumers as we reach a time in the evolution of food consumption where, quite rightly, consumers are concerned about the adverse long-term health impacts of what it is they're eating, particularly in a context where we see an inevitable but tragic march in the current climate towards obesity, particularly in children. Now more than ever, it is important that consumers gain a greater understanding in relation to what it is they're purchasing insofar as food is concerned. That is why country-of-origin labelling and better labels about what is in the food that is being purchased are very helpful. The changes to Australia's country-of-origin labelling arrangements will strengthen the regime and support consumers to make informed choices, which has got to be a good thing regardless of what colour you wear when you come to this place, be it blue, red or some other colour.

Regarding measurement labelling, whilst I think it's good that we see country-of-origin labelling, we're gravely concerned that the government's seeming commitment to clear product labelling does not extend to measurement labelling. Apparently, in response to European cosmetics companies, the government is reviewing whether it should retain the requirement for product measurements—the weight or volume of a product a consumer is purchasing—and whether that should be displayed on the front of a packet. When you go to the shops, thinking that you're going to spend, say, five bucks for a packet of Tim Tams and knowing, at the end of the day, there are going to be 12 Tim Tams in that packet, I'm sure, as consumers, we all know there is nothing worse than finding six months later when you get out your $5 note that you're paying the same amount of money but there are only 10 Tim Tams in your packet. There is nothing worse than being two Tim Tams short of a packet—some have accused some on the other side of, perhaps, a lack of character in that regard—but paying the same price and not knowing about it. Fundamentally, it comes down to a lack of information.

Believe it or not, this is actually because some foreign companies find it inconvenient to change their labelling in the Australian market. For that reason the entire product measurement labelling system is under threat. Consumers across Australia are going to have to spend longer at the supermarket trying to work out whether the purchases they make are subject to that terrible concept of packet shrinkage. Are you getting the same amount of chips in your packet depending upon how much you have to pay?

These things ought to be made clear for consumers. If anything, this government is going the other way.

So I'd urge the minister to listen to the thousands of Australians who have made submissions on behalf of consumers. Don't make it harder for them to know what it is they're buying. And I note that, despite the fact that consultation closed midway through last year, the review is apparently still 'under active consideration'—whatever that means. I'd ask the government exactly when they intend to put consumers' minds at rest about that terrible notion of packet shrinkage. Contrary to what the member for New England said at the time, a label alone does not make a product safe. Actually, it takes a lot more nuance than just telling people not to buy products from a certain country.

There is always more that can be done for product safety. The Australian Consumer Law is deliberately subject to regular review to make sure that it remains robust in the face of changing circumstances and of course new markets. Indeed, the ACL report published in April last year recommended a suite of reforms to the law that were subsequently discussed by federal, state and territory consumer affairs ministers in August last year. The meeting decided to kick the idea of a general safety provision off to more consultation and research, whereas, again, it's a commonsense provision that simply requires manufacturers to take the very reasonable step of ensuring that they have a duty to market products that are inherently safe. You'd think that was already part of the Australian Consumer Law, but it's actually not. We say that it is no quantum leap to ensure that manufacturers of products these days have that obligation in an increasingly busy world where consumers are subject to more and more choice.

As legislators we cannot abrogate our responsibility to keep Australians safe by blaming foreign governments' food safety regimes. So, finally, two years after the frozen berries hepatitis scandal, we actually have a bill that will address the deficiencies in Australia's food importation safety arrangements. That is why Labor welcomes this bill and will support it in the interests of the health and wellbeing of those wonderful Australian consumers.

See this speech in context