Row brewing over GM labelling laws

The Federal Government has intimated that it will oppose comprehensive labelling laws for genetically modified foods because of fears that industry and farmers could face billion-dollar costs if the current proposals go ahead.

Australian and New Zealand state and federal health ministers, due to meet next month as part of the Australian NZ Food Authority, were expected to ratify a rule requiring mandatory labelling of all GM foods.

But according to an article in The Weekly Times, the Federal Government now looks certain to oppose the comprehensive labelling proposals and instead push for a less onerous “threshold” approach.

Federal Agriculture Minister Warren Truss last week criticised the current proposals. Speaking on ABC radio, he said small amounts of GM ingredients should not have to be labelled, otherwise Australian producers could be disadvantaged cost-wise on the world market against manufacturers who did not have to do so.

And if the current proposals go ahead, Australia would also be way out in front of most other countries, something that concerns many trade officials.

It is likely that the Federal Governments alternative would involve a threshold level of GM content – probably 1% in line with the European Union – below which labelling would not be necessary.

“The Federal Government appreciates the need for labelling, but if we go ahead with the current proposal we are just going to penalise ourselves,” a spokesman for parliamentary secretary for health and ANZFA council chairman, Senator Grant Tambling, told The Weekly Times.

Under the current proposals, labelling options include “contains”, “derives from”, “may contain”, “GM-free” or no label at all if tests proved the food contained minimum GM product.

Manufactures would be responsible for testing for GM product and would also have to maintain an “audit trail” right back to the farm.

A consultancy study, commissioned by ANZFA, found that such an approach could cost food producers $500m a year. It also warned that key export markets – notably $1.5bn in dairy products – could suffer a serious backlash from overseas consumers who would perceive Australia to be a major GM producer because of its comprehensive labelling.

“The plan is too severe,” Senator Tamblings spokesman told The Weekly Times. “Wed be light years ahead of the rest of the world in being so prescriptive.

“The EU and Japan could boycott out markets … Our position is that we want to be as consistent as possible with whats happening in the rest of the world.”