Page 1770 - Week 07 - Tuesday, 18 August 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
The whole area of display and advertising raises concerns because there seem to be so many examples in the marketplace of food being displayed in a manner which could be regarded as misleading. One might say, for example, that the pictures of hamburgers above the counter in McDonald's are misleading. Quite often they really do not seem to look the same when you get them. I would hope that the Government would not be looking at this sort of example in their legislation. Butchers often use pink lights to display meat. Fruit and vegetable sellers often use green plastic bags to make their fruit and vegetables look better. I hope that the Food Bill is not intended to apply to these sorts of trivial examples. I accept that there are similar provisions in other States, and, to my knowledge, there have been no problems.
Another area of some concern is the offence entitled, "Sale of falsely described food", in particular, paragraph 12(3)(b). Under this provision the sale of food for which a misleading claim about physiological, curative or therapeutic effects is being made is illegal. Claims are often made about such foods as lecithin, celery juice, oatbran, and the list goes on. These claims, such as oatbran's supposed cholesterol-fighting properties, may be hard to prove in a scientific way. This is not to say that such representations should be an offence. Where these practices need to be controlled, it may be a matter best resolved by trade practices or consumer affairs legislation rather than in the Food Bill. I acknowledge that sometimes claims about a product's alleged therapeutic effects are matters of concern, and on that basis we will not be trying to amend this clause. At the same time, the Food Act will have to be enforced with due sensitivity.
I think it is very important that we have effective food laws. The Liberals will monitor this legislation carefully. The Government should take note that, if there is any indication that powers under this law are being abused, obviously we will introduce amendments. Finally, I urge the Government to remember the very real imposts, in both time and cost, that this sort of legislation can place on small business, and to keep this in mind in the continuing evolution of this important topic. To conclude, the Liberals will support this Bill. Let us hope that the next stage of the Act does not take as long as the first.
MR HUMPHRIES (8.11): Madam Speaker, I also rise, like my colleague Mrs Carnell, to support the passage of this Bill. The Liberal Party is very pleased to see this legislation come before the Assembly. It will give me pleasure later on this evening to discharge the private members business which was introduced a few months ago by the Liberals as a stopgap measure. We are pleased to see this stage reached in this debate. I must say that I rather expected that, this process having gone on for so long, at the end of the day we would see something a little more fulsome than what we have before us at the moment.
Mr Berry: It is not the end of the day yet.
MR HUMPHRIES: At the end of the day, yes.
Mr Berry: The end of the day is a little bit later on.
MR HUMPHRIES: That is right. Madam Speaker, the question is not so much just what successive governments in this place have been able to achieve, but also what successive Federal governments have been able to achieve as stewards of the ACT as they dealt with the aftermath of a decision in May 1980 to provide for
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .