§ 5. Mr. John MarshallTo ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what discussion he has had since taking office with retailers on the subject of food labelling.
§ Mr. MacleanI have met a number of retailers individually and collectively and have discussed with them a wide range of labelling matters.
§ Mr. MarshallApart from these discussions, has my hon. Friend discussed with the industry the need for proper refrigeration and storage? Does he agree that if all retailers were as good as Marks and Spencer, Tesco and Sainsbury there would be no problem of food poisoning?
§ Mr. MacleanI have visited some large superstores especially to look at refrigeration and I am well aware of the high standards in the vast majority of superstores, markets and shops in this country. Nevertheless, my colleagues in the Department of Health are examining measures to improve our refrigeration and storage yet further and we are co-operating fully with them.
§ Mr. Martyn JonesIf the Minister persists in allowing irradiation, will he make sure that irradiated food is labelled as such and does not have a stupid label stuck on it whose meaning would not be obvious to the consumer?
§ Mr. MacleanIt is very simple. I repeat the promise made from this Dispatch Box on many occasions: irradiated food will be properly labelled with the words "irradiated" or "subjected to ionising radiation". A logo is not in itself sufficient.
§ Mr. John GreenwayDoes my hon. Friend agree that if his welcome food labelling initiative is to be successful, the labels on food packages must be honest? What plans does he have to ensure that the origin of food products is clearly marked and that labels marked "British beef', "British lamb" or "British eggs" mean what they say?
§ Mr. MacleanI am delighted to tell my hon. Friend that my right hon. Friend the Minister made that very point in an important speech yesterday. I agree with my right hon. and hon. Friends that labelling must be honest. For example, Britain has set up UKROFS—the United Kingdom register of organic food standards—to ensure that the important organic food sector is not damaged by anyone who puts on food an organic label which it might not deserve. We are trying to introduce that system across the EEC because it is best to have EEC-wide organic food standards.
§ Mr. Ron DaviesIf the Minister understands the importance of information in facilitating consumer choice, why on earth does he not pursue a more vigorous policy? Will he acknowledge that the scheme that he presently favours is only voluntary and will not provide essential information such as the amount of sugar in a product or allow a consumer to differentiate between saturated and unsaturated fats? They are major deficiencies. Will the Minister reconsider the scheme for which he is arguing in the Council and recognise that, if nutrition labelling is to be effective, it must be not only comprehensive but mandatory?
§ Mr. MacleanI reject the hon. Gentleman's point. Britain is in the lead in nutritional labelling in the EEC. The hon. Gentleman must face the political reality that not many other EEC countries agree with the Government's labelling initiative on nutritional standards. As there is no prospect of a compulsory scheme being accepted at this stage, I see no point in bashing my head against a brick wall on this point. However, the hon. Gentleman will be aware that there are requirements in the directive. We can have mandatory labelling for certain nutrients if we perceive a particular risk. The British Government are insisting on a review of the voluntary proposals in three years' time to see whether they are working adequately.