GM
Labelling Practices in Australia
The
Australian Government’s policy for labelling genetically modified (GM) food is
considered adequate. The labelling of GM food is only required for consumer
choice, not safety.
BACKGROUND:
In Australia,
the Food Standards Code is developed and administered by Food Standards
Australia and New Zealand (FSANZ). FSANZ is responsible for food labelling
requirements, as well as regulating the use of ingredients, processing aids,
colourings, minerals, additives and vitamins (FSANZ).
FSANZ is
part of the Australian Government’s Health Portfolio, and is an independent
statutory agency established by the Food Standards Australia New Zealand Act
1991 (FSANZ).
The
enforcement and interpretation of the Code is up to each individual state or
territory departments and food agencies (FSANZ).
Labelling
requirements for GM food falls under Standard 1.5.2 – Foods Produced Using Gene
Technology. The Standard was included in the Code in 2001.
The Code
states GM food must be labelled “Genetically Modified” if:
·
A food, ingredient, additive
or processing aid contains novel DNA or protein
·
Or, where genetic
modification results in altered characteristics
Exempted
from labelling:
·
Products with a less than 1%
cross-contamination of a GM ingredient
·
GM food items with no altered
characteristics
·
Flavourings containing less
than 0.01% of a GM ingredient
·
Food products derived from
animals that were fed GM grain (“Australia New Zealand Food Standard”)
The Gene Technology Act 2000 makes
a distinction between genetically modified organisms (GMO) and genetically
modified (GM) products. A GMO is an organism modified by gene technology, or
has inherited traits from a GMO. A GM product is derived or produced from a
GMO.
FSANZ states
labelling GM food is for consumer choice, not safety. All GM food undertake independent safety
tests by the manufacturers, which are then reviewed by FSANZ. Only when the
food is considered safe for consumption is it allowed to be made available to
the public.
The
safety tests are in accordance with scientific advice from the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development
(OECD), Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations, World
Health Organization (WHO) and the Codex Alimentarius Commission (FSANZ).
STAKEHOLDERS:
Against changes to the labelling Standard:
·
Australian Food and Grocery
Council (AFGC)
·
Australian National Retailers
Association (ANRA)
·
Coles Supermarkets Australia
Pty Ltd
·
Monsanto
·
Cargil
·
WAFarmers (Western Australian
Farmers Association)
For changes to the labelling Standard:
·
Choice – Australian Consumers’
Association
·
GM Free Consumers Network
·
Greenpeace Australia Pacific
·
Public Health Association
Australia (PHAA)
·
Woolworths Limited
·
Organic Federation of Australia
(“An Investigation of”)
CURRENT SITUATION:
There is
a clear division between stakeholders who believe the requirements for
labelling GM food are appropriate, and those who want them increased.
Stakeholders who want the requirements increased are under the understanding
that GM products are unsafe for eating and the environment, and labelling
all GM food would give them peace of mind (“An Investigation of”).
Across
Australia, these stakeholders are signing petitions on Change.org and Choice to
request all GM products be labelled. They are also sending proposals to change
the Standard through FSANZ.
KEY ISSUES:
Issue no. 1:
Labelling
GM products carries controversy. Many stakeholders, such as Greenpeace and the
Public Health Association Australia, declare GM foods are unsafe. They state GM
foods cannot be produced naturally without scientific help, and producers of GM
crops are not being honest about the risks involved with their products.
Choice -
the Australian Consumers’ Association state there are no independent studies
into the benefits or risks of GM food, and the producers of GM crops, such as
Monsanto and Cargill, only release studies that support the safety of their
products.
However,
according to FSANZ, food scientists carefully review all submissions for GM
food, and request additional data if the information is not sufficient. Only
food that has passed these reviews gets approval to be released for public consumption.
Issue no.2:
Products
exempt from labelling is also an issue for stakeholders. FSANZ says these foods
are exempt because the characteristics or composition are the same as non-GM
food.
Products
derived from animals that were fed GM grain are also exempt because they are
not considered a risk since the grain has been tested for safety.
CONSIDERATIONS:
The
Australian Department of Health, and the Western Australian Department of
Agriculture and Food have both conducted independant reviews into the relevancy
of the GM labelling Standard.
In 2008,
the WA Department of Agriculture and Food released “An Investigation of
Labelling Genetically Modified Food.” In 2011, the Australian Department of
Health issued the report “Labelling Logic: Review of Food Labelling Law and
Logic.”
The WA
review decided to keep the Standard as it is, and found:
·
Consumers are interested in
more information about GM products
·
53% of consumers were
concerned about the safety of GM products
·
69% of the consumers wanted
increased labelling of GM products
·
Producers and retailers of GM
products were concerned with the cost of manufacturing if the labelling requirements
were to be increased
The
Australian Department of Health review also found the current Standard 1.5.2 to
be sufficient, and did not require changing since FSANZ considers GM products
to be safe for the public.
The
United States Food and Drug Administrator (FDA) and the Food Standards Agency (FSA)
in the United Kingdom also state GM labelling is only required for consumer
choice.
ANALYSIS/COMMENTS:
Changing
the GM food labelling Standard would increase the cost of manufacturing and the
cost of produce for consumers. It would also have a financial impact on
producers as some consumers may not continue buying their products once they
have been labelled “Genetically Modified” (Byrne).
OPTIONS/RECOMMENDATIONS:
No
recommendation required
CONCLUSION:
FSANZ is
satisfied GM foods hold no safety concerns, and all testing is done rigorously
and scientifically. Because of this, foods containing novel DNA and protein, or
foods containing altered characteristics or composition are labelled; All other
GM products are no different from their non-GM counterparts, so they do not
require labelling. The GM food labelling Standard is appropriate and does
not require altering at this time.
Works Cited:
Australian
Government. Australian and New Zealand Food Regulation Ministerial Council. Response to the Recommendations of Labelling Logic: Review of Food Labelling Law and Policy (2011). 2011. Web.
15 Mar. 2014.
"Australia
New Zealand Food Standard Code 1.5.2: Food Produced Using Gene
Technology." Australian
Government: ComLaw. N.p., 20 Dec. 2000. Web. 1 Apr. 2014.
Byrne, P.
"Labelling of Genetically Modified Foods." Colorado State
University. N.p., Sept. 2010.
Web. 8 Apr. 2014.
Food Standards Australia and New Zealand. N.p., 2013. Web. 17 Mar. 2014. <http://www.foodstandards.gov.au/Pages/default.aspx>.
"GM
Labelling." FSA: Food Standards Agency . N.p., 30 Jan. 2013. Web. 5
Apr. 2014.
Government
of Western Australia. Department of Agriculture and Food. An Investigation of Labelling
Genetically Modified Food. 2008. Web. 1 Apr. 2014.
"Guidance
for Industry." FDA: US Food and Drug Administration. N.p., 21 Feb.
2014. Web. 5 Apr. 2014.
"List
of Genetically Modified Product Approvals ." Australian Government:
Department of Health. N.p.,
27 Mar. 2014. Web. 17 Mar. 2014.
Oakenfull,
David. "Genetically Modified Food Risks." Choice 17 Feb. 2010.
Web. 3 Apr. 2014.
