[DRAFT #1d] [HAIL HYDRA!] Accurate Food Labelling Compact

[Tinhampton]

Character count: 4,103
Word count: 659

Alexander Smith, Tinhamptonian Delegate-Ambassador to the World Assembly: I am aware of the impact that Article c could have on small businesses and am open to negotiation - up to a point, anyway.

OOC: Owen Carey, Natasha Ednan-Laperouse, their deaths and the associated Owen's Law/Natasha's Law campaigns have received sufficient media coverage (in my home country, the United Kingdom) that I have neither the time nor the space to link all of it here. Suffice to say that the following is a fairly accurate and extremely recent summary of the aforementioned.

Accurate Food Labelling Compact
A resolution to enact uniform standards that protect workers, consumers, and the general public.

Category: Regulation

Area of Effect: Consumer Protection

Proposed by: Tinhampton

---

Convinced that every death which happens because someone consumes food without knowing that it contains potentially fatal allergens is a preventable death, and

Believing that requiring the accurate labelling of ingredients, including allergens, on food would benefit not only domestic shoppers but also potentially-confused tourists by helping both groups avoid consuming foods which could seriously imperil their health...

The General Assembly hereby:

1. defines, for the purposes of this resolution:
   
   1. "foodstuffs" as food or drink (but not including vitamins, minerals or similar supplements),
   2. a "prominent sapient species" in a particular member state as a species which makes up at least one percent of all sapient beings in that member state,
   3. a foodstuff that is "not ready to eat" as a foodstuff that must be prepared before a member of a prominent sapient species can safely consume it,
   4. an "allergen" as any ingredient included in foodstuffs which is understood to cause allergic reactions in at least two percent of the population of any prominent sapient species in a member state, and
   5. "nutrients" as the amount of sugar, salt, carbohydrates, protein, fat, fibre, and energy content in a particular foodstuff, and
2. requires each member state to ensure that all packages which contain foodstuffs intended for sale or provision at restaurants employing 250 or more people and stores carry accurate information about:
   
   1. the net weight of that foodstuff,
   2. a list of instructions that must be followed before that foodstuff can be consumed (including the amount of time that each instruction should ordinarily take and what temperature any ovens used in preparing that food must be set at in order to cook that foodstuff to a level safe for sapient consumption), if that foodstuff is not ready to eat, and
   3. the raw amount of nutrients in those foodstuffs, given per 100 grams of that foodstuff, for the net weight of that foodstuff, and as a percentage of how much of those nutrients the member state recommends the population of its most prevalent sapient species should consume per day (if that member state has issued such recommendations),
3. mandates that all packages which contain foodstuffs that are intended for sale and provision at restaurants and stores, and that are already prepared at the time of their being ordered, carry a full and accurate list of ingredients of those foodstuffs, on which:
   
   1. all allergens must be clearly labelled (for example, by being written using a larger or bold font) on the packaging itself, and it must be made clear for what prominent sapient species in that member state these allergens can cause severe or fatal allergic reactions in if there exist multiple prominent sapient species in that member, and
   2. all genetically modified ingredients (GMIs) must be clearly labelled as such,
4. tasks all restaurants in member states, whether or not they sell or provide unpackaged foodstuffs, with ensuring that all of their customers - regardless of species, access to technology as of time of purchase, or any arbitrary and reductive characteristics they may possess - can obtain a full list of allergens in those foodstuffs, as well as whether those foodstuffs contain any GMIs, on request (such as by provision of a menu or encouraging customers to ask about any allergens or GMIs that may be present in their meal of preference),
5. mandates that all information given under Articles b, c, and d be given in any of the official and most commonly spoken language(s) of the member state (or, if applicable, the political subdivision thereof) the foodstuffs for which such information must be given are being sold or provided in, and
6. requires businesses which fail to comply with Articles c(i) or d to pay an appropriate level of financial compensation to the immediate family of any individual who dies as a result of such failure. It is suggested that businesses so non-compliant consider other forms of reparations to affected individuals, such as a formal apology.

[Barfleur]

"Barfleur supports this proposal. Though at first glance the labeling of food may not appear to be a matter for international concern, the preservation of sapient life certainly is, for the same reason as pollution, terrorism, and the death penalty are. A person's life, after all, is the most personal and important thing they have, and this Assembly has historically emphasized the protection of rights."

OOC: I strongly doubt "internet access" is an illegal real-world reference, but I would recommend asking to be sure. You never know what the 11th/13th hour (either immediately before or immediately after you submit!) legality challenge will have to say.

[Tinhampton]

Delegate-Ambassador Alexander Smith: Thank you, Ambassador MacGeorge.

OOC: search.php?keywords=internet&t=30&sf=msgonly

[Tinhampton]

New Articles b(i) and b(ii) added; references to "internet access" in Article c further replaced with references to "access to technology." I have also begun drafting a repeal of GA#88 in light of the realisation that it might prove to be somewhat difficult for businesses in member states where the use of metric units is forbidden to comply with my prospective Article b(iii) at least

[Ardiveds]

OOC: Is the use of the metric system (gram) really necessary? Why not just 'nutrients per a definite amount'? This would also solve issues regarding species that might consume lots of food and thus their packaging might be better off with 'nutrients per kg'. Just saying that shoehorning a specific measurement system where we usually try to avoid being too specific might not be the best idea. Just to clarify, this is regarding clause b.iii

[Tinhampton]

OOC: Is the use of the metric system (gram) really necessary? Why not just 'nutrients per a definite amount'? This would also solve issues regarding species that might consume lots of food and thus their packaging might be better off with 'nutrients per kg'. Just saying that shoehorning a specific measurement system where we usually try to avoid being too specific might not be the best idea. Just to clarify, this is regarding clause b.iii

The remainder of Article b(iii) is clear that nutrient levels "for the net weight of that foodstuff, and as a percentage of how much of those nutrients the member state recommends the population of its most prevalent sapient species should consume per day (if that member state has issued such recommendations)" be specified on foodstuff packaging.

[Ardiveds]

OOC: Is the use of the metric system (gram) really necessary? Why not just 'nutrients per a definite amount'? This would also solve issues regarding species that might consume lots of food and thus their packaging might be better off with 'nutrients per kg'. Just saying that shoehorning a specific measurement system where we usually try to avoid being too specific might not be the best idea. Just to clarify, this is regarding clause b.iii

The remainder of Article b(iii) is clear that nutrient levels "for the net weight of that foodstuff, and as a percentage of how much of those nutrients the member state recommends the population of its most prevalent sapient species should consume per day (if that member state has issued such recommendations)" be specified on foodstuff packaging.

OOC: Should've read the whole thing oops

[Uan aa Boa]

This does nothing to address the depressingly common practice of labeling all foods as potentially containing allergens whether they are actually likely to or not, avoiding the risk of litigation but also depriving allergy sufferers of any useful information.

Considering the worldwide situation concerning plastic pollution we should be seeking to minimise packaging rather encouraging it.

Is is really reasonable to require the vendor of a late night kebab or burger to be able to tell you on demand the precise amount of vitamin B6 it contains per 100g, potentially in multiple languages?

[Tinhampton]

This does nothing to address the depressingly common practice of labeling all foods as potentially containing allergens whether they are actually likely to or not, avoiding the risk of litigation but also depriving allergy sufferers of any useful information.

I am open to solutions about deproblematising the wording of Article a(iii).

Is i[t] really reasonable to require the vendor of a late night kebab or burger to be able to tell you on demand the precise amount of vitamin B6 it contains per 100g, potentially in multiple languages?

No - Article d has been given a bit of a haircut as a result and Article f has totally not been haphazardly slapped on to cover anything along those lines.

[Uan aa Boa]

I am open to solutions about deproblematising the wording of Article a(iii).

The point I was making wasn't really about a(iii), but now you mention it I've just noticed that it's only interested in allergens that cause a severe or fatal reaction in 5% of the population. That's an absurdly high number that wouldn't even require labels to draw attention to peanuts. Anything with the potential to kill 5% of the population isn't an allergen, it's a toxin. But yeah, I'm not sure I want to write stuff for this proposal just because I find species-wank really off-putting.

No - Article d has been given a bit of a haircut as a result and Article f has totally not been haphazardly slapped on to cover anything along those lines.

You misunderstand my point. I'm not just saying it's unreasonable for a burger van to have to provide information on vitamins and minerals. It's just as daft to expect them to tell you about sugar, fat and carbohydrates. Basically, FoodCorp Inc knows the nutritional content of its products in detail because they are produced in large quantities by a highly controlled industrial process. A small cafe that buys some dried goods from a wholesaler and some fresh ingredients from local suppliers and makes small batches of meals from them on a menu that changes daily can't be expected to have this information. There's no benefit to expecting them to calculate how the nutrients per 100g of a sandwich change when you add a handful of lettuce and a dollop of mayo, or to expect those numbers to have the consistency that they would do for products churned out by FoodCorp Inc. Nor is it the cafe's problem if its customers aren't aware of the difference between low and high fat food.

[Tinhampton]

Article a(iv) is clear that an ingredient can be an allergen if it merely causes "severe allergic reactions" among 5% of the population. This threshold has, however, been lowered to the potential to cause an allergic reaction of any description in 2% of the population until further notice.

Changes: Article b has been added to make clear that only large restaurants are subject to this resolution (plus stores). Article b(iv) has been moved into Article c as to keep its scope expanded. Article a(i) has been updated and - now that I've done a bit more thinking about the linked-to article in OP - Article f has been completely revamped.

Continuities: Article c will continue to apply to all stores and restaurants, but now applies only to foodstuffs that are "already prepared at the time of their being ordered," which I hope will be closer in principle to Natasha's Law than originally written. Article d will continue to apply to all restaurants; I do not believe that its requirements - that restaurants inform consumers about the presence of allergens and GMOs - are unduely excessive.

[Tinfect]

[*]all genetically modified ingredients (GMIs) must be clearly labelled as such,

OOC:
This is virtually impossible, and utterly unnecessary fearmongering nonsense besides.