Do we need more detailed food labelling?



YES:

Consumers need and demand useful information and manufacturers are complaining because they prefer packaging full of useless brand images, writes Dermott Jewell

HAVE WE got food labelling providing details and information to the consumer? Yes, we most certainly have and in abundance! And, yes, these labels will give me some information of importance such as the best before or use by date; a list of ingredients; a list of additives; an accreditation as to its organic or even higher status of quality and, of course, a price.

The problem is that other details of equal or greater importance, relevance and even necessity for many consumers are simply not provided. Now, requests and, increasingly even, demands, for same are being very determinedly resisted.

The volume of that resistance is increasing as industry producers and representatives cry low-salt tears at what they claim to be regulatory regimes gone mad, consumer representatives misleading their followers and consumer demand manipulated by misguided and meddling media lacking in scientific support for their unsubstantiated clamouring.

Why the big fuss? Well, predominantly it is due to the fact that packaging is primarily a marketing tool and therefore designed and used particularly to sell the product bedecked with a brand name and colourful, yet impossible to replicate “representation” of the content.

These works of imagination demand large budgets from the agencies that design and deliver them and so the stakes are very, very high. Worse though are the even more colourful banner-style claims, many of which are meaningless and, increasingly, make absurd misrepresentations as to quality and preparation.

The unacceptable fact is that too much of this spin and contrivance does no more than satisfy the producer’s determination to out-brand and outdo the competition through the placement of an often mediocre product with state of the art packaging. It does little to actually inform the purchasing consumer. Of what specific health-oriented and nutritional benefit is the advice to any consumer, in large colourful print and packaging, that this soup is “creamy”, yogurt “natural”, those vegetables “home-style” and these meats produced “with consideration”, not forgetting attention to “tradition”? Apparently, it is all because we are worth it. Yes, terribly scientific and essential! This is not a matter of compliance nor is it a matter of consumers, consumer representatives, health specialists or nutritionists sounding off for the sake of it.

Neither is it a matter of unreasonable expectation, especially considering the fact that the product has to be paid for by the consumer. Details of relevance and importance should be provided in a font size that does not require a magnifier and that actually informs and guides the reader and purchaser as to the healthy and nutritional intake of this food product.

We have a nation of consumers who know that they must take care of their own and their family’s health by eating the correct foods in the recommended amount. In response to this, we now have the industry providing Guideline Daily Allowance (GDA) information on the front of packs. This is, in their opinion, the best way of informing consumers as to the maximum percentage intake for calorie, fat, sugar, salt and carbohydrate content. It is a positive move, but not necessarily the right move.

GDAs do not provide immediate understandable detail for every consumer. We do not require to, nor should we be, guided towards what is a maximum intake of salt, fats or sugar, but rather advised simply as to the high, medium or low existence of these ingredients in our food. With a continuing rise in the levels of diet-related health problems such as obesity, diabetes and heart disease, we need consideration and provision of the best detail. It is the traffic light system, preferred by consumer food representatives and advocates across many EU member states, that simply and understandably provides this detail for the consumer.

Origin is another issue and so too is GM, especially where this is a food product that has been through various processes in a variety of factories and plants in various locations. That is why this question posed requires being qualified through the answer.

It is not necessary to see more detail, but rather the important and essential detail provided in the most readable and understandable way. These details are now, more than ever, required to vie for place, quality and size with information determined to be of more importance by the producer and retailer. This balance must change so that we can then perhaps move on to the limited space allocated for this necessary advice in proportion to that existing for the brand, various logos and associated advertising trivia.

We as consumers now require a progressive attitude to our food labelling because it is essential to our well-being. It is time to acknowledge the continuing truth and relevance of the adage “the devil is in the detail”. Detail is necessary here; consumers know it, are asking for it and are entitled to it.

Dermott Jewell is chief executive of the Consumers’ Association of Ireland

Your Vote
Should Queen Elizabeth visit Ireland?
Advertisement
Advertisement