View report page

48
REPORT OF THE DEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE ON THE COMPOSITION AND DESCRIPTION
OF FOOD.
This Departmental Committee was originally appointed in 1931, but in the interests
of economy, operations were suspended and re-started in July, 1933, on the following terms
of reference :—
" To consider whether it is desirable that the law relating to the composition
and description of articles of food should be altered so as to enable definitions or standards
to be prescribed, or declarations of composition to be required, for articles of food other
than liquid milk ; and if so, to recommend what alterations of the law are required."
The conclusions and recommendations of the Committee are as follows :—
The law should be altered so that standards should be prescribed and declarations of composition
required.
The enabling power should be vested in the Minister of Health.
In some foods, standards or declarations are unnecessary, but in important articles of food it is
desirable that the public should know what they are getting.
Standards or declarations should only be fixed or made where analysis or other examination can
be a check.
The guiding consideration should be that the same term should always mean the same thing.
The terms of reference did not cover a consideration of particular articles of food, but sausages,
meat pastes, potted meats, infants' and invalids' food, jam, cream, confectionery and other articles
were considered for the purpose of hearing the views of witnesses on the general question.
Almost all witnesses urged that infants' and invalids' food should bear on the label of the package
a declaration of their contents.
Purchasers of toffee were getting what they wanted, whether toffee be made with butter or nut
fat. It might be desirable to prohibit certain ingredients in sweetmeats, but definitions were not
needed.
The limits or standards as to arsenic, tin, lead or other contaminating impurity, and also additions
to food for the purpose of carriage or consumption should also come under review.
Complaints as to misleading advertisements and labelling are well founded. It is agreed in principle
that, for purposes of evidence as to the nature, quality, and substance demanded, claims made
in advertisement should be part of the package label.
The retailer of a pre-packed article needs the protection of an alteration of the law in cases where
samples are found not to be genuine. The responsibility should be transferred to the packer if the
retailer can show that the article was sold as received. A label or invoice should constitute a warranty.
The packer should have the option of fixing a time limit, beyond which he is safeguarded against
deterioration in condition.
If a Food and Drugs Authority finds a pre-packed article on sale and contravening legal requirements,
action should be taken at the premises where the article is packed. If the premises are in the
district of another Authority, this other Authority should be required to cause samples to be taken
from the despatch department of the packer's premises, and should be empowered to take proceedings
if the packer's samples are reported against. This entails extension of powers of entry and sampling
to which no serious objection on the part of manufacturers or wholesalers is anticipated.
No new permanent advisory committee or other tribunal for the purpose of setting standards
and definitions is contemplated. The Ministry of Health has an efficient Foods Department.
The power to fix standards and definitions should be exercised by means of an Order, a draft of
the Order to be published and ample time allowed to interested persons to state their objections.
Some articles would probably be agreed by interested parties after informal conversations and
would form the subject of the first Order.
Subsequent orders would or would not be made on consideration by the Minister of reports made
to him and after consultations with the various interests involved, especially where there is divergence
of opinion.
Importations which contravene the orders would be provided against.
There would be no material alteration in expense to Local Authorities ; but, perhaps, a reduction
if the law were altered so as not to require an analysis of foods whose nature might be otherwise
determined.
The time is ripe for consolidation of the Statutes dealing with the composition of food.
With these conclusions, I am in full agreement.