FREE-RANGE EGGS

Mrs GERAGHTY (Torrens) (14:44): My question is to the Minister for Business Services and Consumers. Can the minister please inform the house about developments in relation to standards for free-range eggs across Australia, as well as advise about developments to establish a South Australian standard?

The SPEAKER: Deputy Premier, any puns will be severely punished.

The Hon. J.R. RAU (Enfield—Deputy Premier, Attorney-General, Minister for Planning, Minister for Industrial Relations, Minister for Business Services and Consumers) (14:45): I shall try to avoid them. Mr Speaker, thank you for giving me that advice, and I thank the honourable member for her question.

Mrs Geraghty: I only eat free-range eggs.

The Hon. J.R. RAU: The honourable member only eats free-range eggs. As I reported to the house recently, the South Australian government has cracked an industry code that will regulate what constitutes a true free-range egg in South Australia. The standard that will be established will require that the eggs to be produced in the system, first of all, have a stocking rate of no more than 1,500 hens per hectare; secondly, hens are allowed access to free range for at least eight hours a day; thirdly, they do not undertake induced malting; and fourthly, adequate protection is provided on the free range. I know the member for Finniss is sympathetic with this, and many of his constituents on the island are actually exemplars in this area.

This stocking density number is consistent with legislation that was enacted in Queensland to define free-range eggs in that state. However, recent changes to regulation in Queensland by the Campbell Newman government would allow producers with stocking densities of up to 10,000 hens per hectare to call themselves free-range. This decision hurts true free-range producers, who are to be considered the same as producers with stocking densities more than 600 per cent higher. It hurts the animal welfare cause by not providing a commercial incentive for producers to meet acceptable standards. It hurts consumers, who will be told a product is free-range, when it by most definitions clearly is not.

This leaves the Queensland legislation, which some people have been advocating, a complete empty shell. Our code will be industry based and empower consumers. I urge the Queensland government to reconsider its decision. I also call on other states to flock around a national definition for free-range eggs that sets 1,500 hens per hectare as the stocking density. Given its effects on primary producers, consumers and animal welfare, the South Australian government takes this issue seriously, and is committed to ensuring that the standard for free-range eggs set by this government will not exceed 1,500 hens per hectare.

We are also committed to ensuring that South Australian eggs that meet our standard are eligible to be labelled as premium South Australian product and truly free-range. All eggs are not the same. The government maintains that our approach is:

good for consumers, providing assurances about what they are buying and empowering them;

good for animal welfare, producing a commercial incentive for producers to adhere to true free-range standards; and

good for industry, giving South Australian producers a symbol to help consumers recognise them as premium and truly free-range.

This is a better approach than legislation, as it assists true free-range egg producers while not shattering other elements of the industry.