SUBSCRIBE

Breaking News on Food, Beverage & Supplement Development - Asia PacificEU edition | US edition

Headlines > Policy

New recommendations to stifle Australia's palm oil labelling bill?

2 commentsBy Ankush Chibber , 20-Sep-2011
Last updated the 20-Sep-2011 at 17:32 GMT

Australia’s controversial palm oil labelling bill may not be passed into law following new recommendations by a committee of the Australian House of Representatives.

The recommendations, which were made by the House of Representatives Economics Committee, said that the Truth in Labelling - Palm Oil Bill 2011would be “ineffective in changing labelling laws.”

The committee further stated that the legislation would harm Australia’s international relationships, threatens nationally uniform consumer laws and would not solve the problem of deforestation.

The bill is aimed at making consumers aware of palm oil as an ingredient. Palm oil can currently be listed as vegetable oil on packaging.

Originally proposed by independent Senator Nick Xenophon, the bill was based on environmental concerns, citing deforestation in Indonesia and Malaysia for palm oil production.

The bill was passed by the Senate at the end of June and is now awaiting consideration in House of Representatives, where if passed, it will be a law.

Opposition to the bill welcomes recommendations

The bill has been widely opposed from all quarters, most recently by the federal government which said it would violate Australia’s obligations under the World Trade Organization (WTO) and put Australian food businesses under extra compliance costs of AU$150m.

But there is still a risk that the bill might become law, as the federal government and the opposition coalition have parity in numbers. As of the current status, the ruling government controls 72 seats in the House of Representatives, while the opposition coalition also controls 72 seats.

However, the Australian and Food Grocery Council (AFGC) is now confident and has called on both the government and the opposition coalition to oppose the palm oil labelling legislation.

In a statement, AFGC chief executive Kate Carnell said that the recommendations man that it is now critical for the House of Representatives to reject this Bill – which is unworkable and will be a significant new cost to industry.

Carnell reiterated her previous statements Australia only uses 0.3 per cent of the world's palm oil and most of the affected food companies in Australia have committed to using certified, sustainable palm oil by 2015, or when available in sufficient quantities. A change in labelling is therefore not required, she said.

2 comments (Comments are now closed)

House should reject Bill

The Australian House of Representatives should vote out the Palm Oil Labeling Bill for the simple reason that it is right so to do.

After all, the House's own Economics Committee has recommended that the Bill be rejected, having heard representations from stakeholders. Having done so, it is obvious that the Committee is now better informed on the issue and have rejected the hype, misinformation and falsehoods spread by environmental organizations on palm oil.

How can the allegations even be remotely true when palm oil has been planted on just a mere 0.23% of the world's agricultural land surface area and yet produce an amazing 30% of the world's supply of edible oil? It is perhaps this incredible hyper yielding nature of palm oil that has made it a target for mercenary environmental organizations happy to sell their services to rein in this innocent crop on behalf of palm oil competitors who've run out of ideas and have found it impossible to deal with the wonder crop in the open market!

Report abuse

Posted by Palm Oil Truth Foundation
27 September 2011 | 12h05

Test of Australian Sense and Sensibilities

This Truth in Labeling (Palm Oil) Bill is a test of Australian sense and sensibilities towards friendly nations.

It is significant that the Australian government and the House Economic Committee who have heard representations on the matter, and are consequently more well informed on the issue, have come out against the passage of the Bill.

Wise heads have ruled for the Bill is premised entirely on false assumptions and the unwarranted consequences that will befall Australia's international relations, increase costs burdens on Australian industry and ultimately will not help stop deforestation as palm oil is probably the most benign of all edible oilseeds in terms of land usage requirements due to its hyper yield nature.

Report abuse

Posted by Palmhugger
23 September 2011 | 04h15

Key Industry Events