Nick Xenophon (SA, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

I strongly support this urgency motion. There has been a distinct absence of political will for many years to deal with this issue. I note as recently as 2011 that the Blewett review Labelling logic was tabled—a very comprehensive review by Dr Blewett and not radical in its recommendations. It was tabled on 28 January 2011, yet there was no action by the former government nor was there any appetite by the then opposition to deal with this issue. This is an important issue. If you give consumers a choice, they will act accordingly.

We know in the Northern Territory, in terms of seafood-labelling laws, at takeaway shops and restaurants where you have to specify whether it is local or imported seafood, there has been a real boost to local produce. More and more people buy local produce. They are willing to pay a premium for clean, green Australian produce. We know from barramundi farmers and prawn farmers of Australia that thousands of jobs could be created if we could only improve our labelling laws.

The major parties should not have been surprised by the outcry for these laws in recent weeks. In that, I do not include the Nationals, because they have been long-time advocates of decent food-labelling laws. It is unfortunate that it has taken more than 20 Australians to fall victim to hepatitis A, apparently contracted from imported frozen berries processed in China, to trigger a groundswell for change. I applaud the agriculture minister, Barnaby Joyce, for his announcement last week that commits the government to improvements in the current imported food-labelling requirements, but I fear there will be others in the coalition who will try and stymie him.

I know that Minister Joyce has been committed to this issue for some time. In fact, in 2009, we jointly sponsored, along with then Senator Bob Brown, a bill on this issue. There is now a similar bill that Senator Milne has introduced that I am co-sponsoring with pride. I will work constructively with the government on this issue because the problem is serious and long overdue for reform. Our labelling laws allow for the exploitation of farmers and the duping of consumers. They allow for words like 'made in Australia' to be twisted and contorted to be effectively meaningless, in many cases.

We know that the hepatitis Aoutbreak also highlighted our inadequate food-safety regime, set up by FSANZ and carried out, in part, by the agriculture department. For several years, the European Union, Canada and the US have seen similar hepatitis Acontamination scares linked to imported frozen berries, and yet authorities here sat on their hands. As country-of-origin labelling reforms are hammered out in coming weeks, we need to keep in mind absurd situations like one heard by the Senate select committee inquiry into food processing. Fish caught in the Atlantic Ocean by a South Korean flagged ship was sent to China for processing and then to New Zealand for further processing. It was then sent to Australia, where it was crumbed, packaged and sold to an unsuspecting public as 'made in Australia' fish. That misled consumers and cheated local Australian-made fish producers.

The details are yet to emerge of what the government is proposing but, apparently, a diagram will be used and consumers will be told what percentage of the product is from Australia. It sounds like a positive step. We must resist the lobby in this, and I urge Senator Carr to consider this.

If we have decent food-labelling laws, if they are practical, if they are workable, then we will see increased employment in the sector. More Australians will be employed in the manufacturing sector. The rorting of 'Made in Australia' labels, using the packaging trick, is common and it has to stop. Including packaging as part of the value is wrong.

Orange growers in the Riverland are being sold down the river by juice processors who, after transport costs, pay zero, zilch, a crate for Australian oranges. My friend Ron Gray from the Riverland, who has been a passionate advocate for this issue, has made this point on many occasions. He recently had a situation where he got nothing for his oranges after transport costs to the processors were taken into account. That is wrong. The processors juice the oranges, mixing the juice with cheap imported concentrate sometimes, and then sell it to supermarkets as made in Australia because it was packaged here.

The government could move today to set up an internet site to instantly update the country-of-origin status of all imported food in Australia. That would not be difficult. It could be done. Logistically, it gets away from the arguments of the Australian Food and Grocery Council, who have been too powerful in this. We have the information available to do it but we just have not done it, and we need to do so. These are important issues that must be dealt with. If there is some political will, we can at least give consumers that instant access online, as an interim measure. That in itself would be very powerful, because I believe the media will pick up on those juices, those foods, that do not have as much Australian content as we thought they did by virtue of the misleading 'Made in Australia' label. Real choice would be placed in the hands of Australians for the first time—the choice to buy on quality and safety ahead of price alone. In many cases we can compete well in relation to that. We need to bite the bullet on this for Australian farmers and consumers alike. We need to reform our food-labelling laws as a matter of urgency.