With food health and hygiene, you cannot have one law for some and another law for others, according to the Tasmanian Farmers and Graziers Association.
“We’re told the recent changes to egg labeling regulations reflect an assessed risk of food contamination from poor handling and other factors. If this is a real health risk, you cannot exempt backyard and small producers from being responsible for what they sell,” TFGA chief executive Jan Davis said today.
Ms Davis was commenting on a move by the Tasmanian Greens to exempt people with fewer than 50 hens from new regulations that come into force on November 26. These regulations will require any eggs sold in Tasmania to be stamped with identifying information.
“The rationale is that, if there is a problem, we have to be able to isolate the producer responsible,” Ms Davis said. “If you exempt a large segment of the industry that supplies eggs, even if it is a backyard industry, you destroy the integrity of the risk assessment system. Of particular concern is that, in many cases, this smaller segment is actually the greatest source of potential risk.
“Therefore it has to be all in or none in. Otherwise it’s a clear case of discrimination,” Ms Davis said.
“This is the sort of community division that arises when governments do not do their homework and do not consult with the appropriate people involved in the industry before they decide to act. I have already said that these regulations are typical of the nanny state approach common to governments in Australia today.
“If these regulations are to be introduced, they must be imposed on all those who supply the market, not just the bigger players. A salmonella outbreak is not excusable simply because it derives from a small producer.
“If there is a problem with the administration of the regulations or the cost to smaller producers, then let’s deal with that as a separate.”
“What’s good for the goose has to be good for the gander,” she said.
TFGA chief executive Jan Davis
