HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-Second Parliament, Second Session (52-2)
2012-09-19 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

Parliamentary Committees

SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE: INQUIRY INTO FOOD SAFETY PROGRAMS

The Hon. J.M. GAZZOLA (16:15): I move:

That the report of the committee on an Inquiry into Food Safety Programs be noted.

In conducting the inquiry, the committee focused on the aims and objectives of food safety rating schemes intended to provide the public with information about the results of food safety inspections and noncompliance with the Food Act.

The committee was interested in understanding whether these schemes improved compliance with food safety regulation and what the costs and benefits were. The committee was also concerned with understanding the impact on consumers and the food industry, as well as local and state government. During the course of the inquiry, the committee heard evidence from health professionals in local and state government, the food industry sector, food industry peak bodies, local food businesses and consumers.

The inquiry was concerned with medium and high risk food businesses such as cafes, restaurants, hotels, catering businesses and takeaway food outlets. It did not include food businesses that the Australian government is responsible for presiding over, or food businesses which supply food to vulnerable populations such as hospitals, aged care facilities and childcare centres. The inquiry was focused on food standards as they are practised by food businesses in accordance with the relevant national and state food regulations.

Before going further, I would like to take this opportunity to thank the former presiding member of the committee, the Hon. Ian Hunter, for his valuable contribution. Also, from the other place, I would like to thank Ms Frances Bedford MP, Mr Alan Sibbons MP, Mr David Pisoni MP, and the Hon. Dr Bob Such. From this chamber I would like to thank the Hon. Kelly Vincent, the Hon. Jing Lee and the Hon. Dennis Hood for their contributions.

Inquiries such as this would not be possible without the cooperation and contribution of the many individuals and organisations who gave up their valuable time to come forward and give information to the committee. We thank all those who presented evidence to this inquiry whether through the provision of written submissions or by appearing before the committee. Last but not least, and importantly, I would like to thank the staff of the Social Development Committee for their contribution.

The committee commenced hearing public evidence in May 2011 and finished hearing evidence in September 2011. In the course of its inquiry, the committee received 11 written submissions and heard testimony from seven separate groups of witnesses. Additional information was sourced from South Australian, national and overseas research to assist the committee in its deliberations and provide a context to the issue of food safety in South Australia.

Every day people purchase takeaway food from bakeries, caterers and takeaway food outlets. It is estimated that one in every three Australians over 18 years of age are eating out in cafes, restaurants and hotels at least once a week. Each year, 5.4 million people are affected by food poisoning in Australia. The annual cost to the community is estimated to be about $1.2 billion. There are significant healthcare costs in terms of expenditure on medications and lost productivity.

Food poisoning accounts for more than a million visits to general practitioners, more than 300,000 prescriptions for antibiotics, and two million days off work per year. The committee considers that food consumers have a right to know that the food they purchase at restaurants, cafes and other food businesses is safe. Furthermore, they need to be assured that they are not placed at risk of contracting food poisoning as a result of the quality of the food or poor food handling practices.

Evidence presented to the committee suggests that the best way to control the risk of food poisoning is to ensure that high standards of food preparation are established and maintained. State and local governments play an important role in ensuring there are high standards of food safety in place by administering and enforcing food regulation. A crucial aspect of South Australia's overall health care system is ensuring that food safety standards prescribed in regulation are adhered to.

The committee heard that the public health benefits that result from the food regulations currently in place are clearly evident. The introduction of a uniform food safety management scheme, supported by both industry training and community education, would significantly reduce the risk of food poisoning.

Typically, a food safety management scheme would involve a regular inspection by council environmental health officers. Depending on the level of compliance with food regulations, a score is given and a rating results. The food business displays the rating on their premises. This rating could be a star, a numbered score or a letter rating, for example. It would also be posted on the internet.

Such a scheme would provide consumers with valuable information to assist them to make informed choices about where they purchase food, knowing that the food outlet has scored well in terms of food safety practices. This type of scheme would provide transparency and accountability in the food industry sector.

The inquiry was told that work is already underway at a national level by the Food Regulation Standards Committee on the development of a national approach for a food safety rating scheme. The Minister for Health, the Hon. John Hill, and the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Fisheries, the Hon. Gail Gago, represent the interests of South Australia on this committee.

The committee repeatedly heard overwhelming evidence that the operation of food safety rating schemes in Australia and overseas has improved the level of compliance with food regulation. These schemes have provided encouragement for food businesses to improve their food hygiene standards. Program evaluations have consistently shown a direct link between food safety disclosure schemes, improved food safety standards and, hence, compliance.

Some witnesses to the inquiry were cautious of creating unnecessary red tape. They agreed that the community deserves to know if a business is putting public health at risk and as such would support the introduction of a food safety rating scheme as long as it was voluntary and consistently applied.

The committee recognises that the introduction of a uniform food safety rating scheme, consistently applied, would increase public awareness of food safety and offer an effective approach to providing the public with information about the commitment of individual food businesses to safe and hygienic food handling practices. The committee is of the view that there still needs to be frequent inspections by local government environmental health officers to ensure that food safety standards are being met.

A number of public disclosure food safety programs have been introduced, in Australia and overseas, to improve the standards of food preparation and the sale of safe food, to improve compliance with food safety regulation and to provide consumers with information about the cleanliness and safety of food businesses. The committee heard that two councils have introduced schemes in South Australia in the past few years, namely, the City of Salisbury and the City of Charles Sturt. The operation of all of these schemes varies widely.

A uniform, consistently applied scheme is necessary to prevent the proliferation of multiple programs operating across the state, which would confuse consumers when dining out and purchasing takeaway food, depending on which council region they were in in different local government areas.

Finally, the committee considers that all South Australian consumers of food would benefit from the introduction of a food safety rating scheme. The introduction of a consistent statewide scheme has obvious public health benefits. It would give consumers valuable information to assist them to make informed choices. No matter where they are, consumers could make an informed decision about where to eat or purchase safe and hygienically prepared food. An additional spin-off is that food businesses that receive a good rating are likely to receive an economic advantage as a consequence of increased patronage.

The committee has put forward a total of 20 recommendations for the introduction of a voluntary scheme that would be easily understood by consumers, food businesses and food inspection agencies, provide encouragement and incentives for food businesses to comply with regulation and take into account differences between metropolitan and rural councils and remote regions of South Australia. Once again, I thank the members of the committee and the assistance and work of committee secretary Robyn Schutte and committee researchers Sue Markotic and Carmel O'Connell.

Debate adjourned on motion of Hon. T.J. Stephens.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT