Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 11 Hansard (21 October) . . Page.. 3436 ..

MS TUCKER (continuing):

(b) in a standard type of at least 6mm;

(c) set against a contrasting background; and

(d) in the same direction as the majority of the other wording on that surface of the packaging.".

This motion relates to the legislation passed by this Assembly in 1997 to ban the production and sale in the ACT of eggs produced by hens kept in battery cages. The complementary part of this legislation was to require the labelling of egg cartons to indicate the conditions under which the hens that produce the eggs are kept. The labelling requirement seemed to be an important public awareness raising mechanism during the six-year phase-out period of battery eggs. The ban on the production and sale of battery cage eggs has not been able to be implemented due to a requirement in the legislation that an exemption under the Commonwealth Mutual Recognition Act needed to be obtained first.

Unfortunately, other States have not agreed to this exemption. However, the labelling requirement was not subject to gaining this exemption and legislation on the labelling requirement came into effect on 20 September 1999. To his credit, the responsible Minister, Mr Moore, proceeded with implementing the labelling requirement, even though other States did not support it. The result has been that the labelling requirement can only be applied to eggs produced in the ACT and not eggs imported from other States. However, given that the Bartter egg farm at Parkwood supplies about 80 per cent of the ACT's egg consumption, implementation of the egg labelling requirement will have a considerable impact on the ACT egg market.

The egg labelling requirement is a natural extension of the principle that consumers have a right to receive information from producers about the products they sell, so that consumers can make informed decisions about which product to buy. In fact, the Productivity Commission, in its report on the public benefit of banning the production and sale of battery cage eggs that was commissioned by the ACT Government, concluded that many consumers have a poor understanding of the animal welfare implications of the different egg production systems. Labelling of egg cartons to indicate the manner in which the eggs have been produced would benefit some of these consumers.

The extent of this benefit cannot be quantified. However, associated costs are likely to be negligible. The commission considers that the benefits of the legislative amendments relating to the labelling outweigh the costs. The commission commented that while some egg cartons are labelled with their mode of production, eg free-range eggs, free-range or barn, as a positive marketing feature, battery cage eggs are not labelled as such. These eggs are labelled as farm fresh eggs and some display drawings of happy looking hens which could imply non-cage production to some consumers. Obviously, battery egg producers do not want to publicise the fact that their eggs come from battery cage hens.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .