Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.


Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 
27287 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6721

Moderator
Trusted
Biddle Corp
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1954638 10-Feb-2018 08:23
4 people support this post
Send private message

As somebody who's job in a former life was being responsible for compliance it's safe to say I had plenty of arguments with Foodstuffs about this.

 

In a nutshell it's pure laziness from Pak 'n Save. Nothing else. They don't want to bother maintaining ingredients and NIP for products so simply don't bother. As recipes are different between stores they are responsible for maintaining these so much of what was on the labelling was never 100% correct anyway.

 

There has long between debate over the interpretation of the law when it comes to things such as this I don't believe the wording of the law exempts the products, and it was certainly not the intention of ANZFA (before the FSANZ days) when the joint food standards to have such glaring exemptions. The sticker also verges on being illegal even if you are of the opinion pre-packaged bakery products are exempt from mandatory NIP and ingredients since it does not declare allergens on the label which is a basic requirement even on products where NIP and ingredients are not required.

 

The problem with the labelling laws since the day they came out is there is very little enforcement. It takes people to complain before things happen, and even then things don't necessarily happen. It's still not hard to find products sold in stores and supermarkets that don't even have basic things such as NZ contact details for a distributor on them, let alone ingredients and NIP data that meets FSANZ standards.

 

 


12165 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3969

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1954682 10-Feb-2018 10:18
One person supports this post
Send private message

blakamin:

 

Geektastic:

 

Why would food made on the premises or packaged in front of you be exempt from the labelling requirement?

 

 

So every time you went to subway, you expect a food label? A pizza shop? Sandwich bar? Food court? Bunnings BBQ sausage?

 

 

 

Seriously?

 

 

 

 

For a Bunnings BBQ sausage? Absolutely. Those things contain eye holes, ear holes and **** holes! I wouldn't eat one of those without knowing the contents.






 
 
 
 


6352 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1109

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1954691 10-Feb-2018 11:06
One person supports this post
Send private message

I've seen this at New World too. Previously the details were printed on the label, although I lost all confidence when I bought a muffin that claimed to have something like 25000 kJ worth of energy.


2589 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1238


  Reply # 1955389 11-Feb-2018 19:20
Send private message

It's not deceptive, as they aren't telling fibs. There is no deceit. It would be deceptive if they claimed the product was something that it wasn't - such as vegan when it contained meat, or gluten free when it contained gluten (much like Vodafones misleading and deceptive "FibreX" branding).

 

If you don't like the sufficiency of the labeling, maybe just don't buy the product?


gzt

10317 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1585


  Reply # 1955399 11-Feb-2018 19:45
Send private message

It's easily deceptive if the dept cannot tell you with any accuracy.

Beyond that I trust sbiddles experienced opinion above this is not legal.

It is unlikely the exemptions were intended for industrial scale manufacturers.



2462 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1143

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1955419 11-Feb-2018 20:09
Send private message

JimmyH:

 

It's not deceptive, as they aren't telling fibs. There is no deceit. It would be deceptive if they claimed the product was something that it wasn't - such as vegan when it contained meat, or gluten free when it contained gluten (much like Vodafones misleading and deceptive "FibreX" branding).

 

If you don't like the sufficiency of the labeling, maybe just don't buy the product?

 

 

Re the 'sufficiency of the label' - the label said 'See department for ingredients'. But the department couldn't tell us what the ingredients were.

 

Clearly they never expected anyone to actually bother to 'see the department', so the label is misleading.

 

Perhaps the label should be re-worded to say 'Ingredients: you guess'


1 | 2 
Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic



Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.


Geekzone Live »

Our community of supporters help make Geekzone possible. Click the button below to join them.

Support Geezone on PressPatron



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.