Legislative Council Fifty-Second Parliament, Second Session (52-2) 52 2 Parliament of South Australia Legislative Council published Question Time Free-Range Eggs FREE-RANGE EGGS The Hon. T.A. FRANKS Legislative Council FREE-RANGE EGGS The Hon. T.A. FRANKS (15:07): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Fisheries a question about free-range eggs. Leave granted. The Hon. T.A. FRANKS Legislative Council The Hon. T.A. FRANKS: I refer the minister to the recent media reports regarding the ACCC taking action in the Federal Court against a South Australian egg supplier. The action alleges that eggs being sold to customers in South Australia as 'free-range eggs' were in fact cage eggs, alleging that such conduct contravenes section 55 of the Trade Practices Act 1974, now known as the Competition and Consumer Act 2010. Whilst I commend the ACCC on taking this action to ensure that consumers who are making an ethical purchasing decision in response to the well documented suffering and misery endured by caged hens by purchasing eggs labelled as 'free-range' are not misled or defrauded, I wish to now raise several issues with the minister in the form of the following questions: 1.	Is the minister aware of differing definitions as to what constitutes free-range stocking densities from the RSPCA's definition of 1,500 birds per hectare to the Australian Egg Corporation Limited's 2010 decision that saw a stocking density definition of free-range increase by a massive 1,233 per cent from 1,500 to 20,000 birds per hectare? 2.	Is the minister concerned that, in the absence of a universally accepted and enforceable definition of 'free-range', the birds that lay the eggs that are labelled free-range under the Egg Corporation's quality assured scheme may live in appalling conditions? 3.	Is the minister aware that such conditions for caged birds may include beak and toe trimming, induced malting and extremely cramped living conditions leading to de-feathering, high mortality rates and stress levels and, ultimately, cannibalism? 4.	Can the minister advise whether the government supports establishing an enforceable regulatory scheme here in South Australia for the labelling of free-range eggs to provide certainty for consumers and egg producers, and stop the fraudulent rip-offs? The Hon. G.E. GAGO Legislative Council Minister for Agriculture, Food and Fisheries, Minister for Forests, Minister for Regional Development, Minister for Tourism, Minister for the Status of Women The Hon. G.E. GAGO (Minister for Agriculture, Food and Fisheries, Minister for Forests, Minister for Regional Development, Minister for Tourism, Minister for the Status of Women) (15:10): I thank the member for her most important question. Indeed the issue of food labelling—or produce labelling—is a very vexed one, and I certainly share some of the degree of frustration that the Hon. Tammy Franks obviously shows in her question. The issue of egg labelling is one that really needs to be dealt with in a nationally consistent way because of the way eggs move across borders. It is important that we do not add to the confusion by having different sets of standards around the states; we should be moving towards the setting of a uniform standard. It is not just eggs that are the problem. The honourable member would be well aware of the issues and vexations around 'country of origin' labelling. How much of the produce is covered? Is it the contents, is it where it is packaged, is it where it is packaged by where the packaging comes from? There are all these really complex dynamics around labelling. It is the same with free range: what is free range? The honourable member quite rightly points to many different definitions around what might constitute free range. The problem is that we have not been able to get the parties—the industries, welfare bodies and other key stakeholders—to be able to land on what is a reasonable assessment. What we are trying to do all the time is to ensure, first, that products are safe and don't produce any sickness or contamination, so that it is good quality, healthy food and, secondly, that there is consistency around the labelling and that we do that in a way that informs consumers so that they can make purchase decisions in an informed way, but without creating a regulatory, red-tape, paperwork framework that becomes so cumbersome and unwieldy that it unduly impacts on the price of the commodity that then means that people are having less access to good, healthy, nutritious food. So, as I said, these are vexed issues; there are many definitions around, and a great deal of work is being done to try to bring the industry to land on this. As I said, it is not just with eggs and the issue around free range, but also things like 'clean green'. There are just so many food terms out there that are not clearly designed, and it would be helpful if we could find a common acceptable definition that would assist consumers to make much more informed decisions. I am happy to continue work on this; I am happy to continue with the Hon. Tammy Franks to find ways forward where we can unite the different interest groups to land on this. I am certainly very committed to pursuing a national approach, not just a state approach, because I think that just puts another layer of confusion into the system. As I said, I would certainly invite the Hon. Tammy Franks to work constructively with me—or me with her—to help progress this fairly vexed area of policy. The President Legislative Council The PRESIDENT: The Hon. Ms Franks has a supplementary.