[PASSED] - Pre-Packaged Food Labels

[Simone Republic]

Motivation

This is the first replacement for GAR 64 (Food and Drug Standards), now that it has been repealed. It sets out rough parameters for labelling of food products imported or distributed in a WA state, such as ingredients, nutrients, use of various food processing technologies, etc. Each state is responsible for formulating its own standards, so the powers are largely returned to each state, rather than centralised under a single bureaucracy.

The notorious "Herby clause" is gone since "Herby has no reason to buy mineral water anyway".

Product origin (and manufacturing and storage instructions, including expiry dates) have been hived off to a separate resolution because of the complexity of food origin location laws and the need to handle different calendars in the GA multi-verse.

It is very roughly based off:

FAO Guidelines on Nutrition Labelling
https://www.fao.org/fao-who-codexalimen ... G_002e.pdf

FAO General Standard for the Labelling of Prepackaged Foods
https://www.fao.org/fao-who-codexalimen ... S_001e.pdf

Category: Regulation/Consumer Protection

Re-draft, resubmitted

The World Assembly (WA),

Noting the frequent trade in pre-packaged food products between WA states;

Believing that consumers would be better informed to make decisions on their own well-being if labels on products from different WA states are reasonably standardized to ease comparison, and contain pertinent information for the consumer;

The WA hereby enacts as follows:

1. Definitions.
   
   1. "Authority" means one or more government entities (at the national or sub-national levels) designated by a WA state to be in charge of formulating, enforcing and interpreting the regulations.
   2. "Food" means anything farmed, grown, or developed for consumption by sapient individuals.
   3. "Regulations" means all standards and requirements for templates and labelling for products according to clauses (2) to (4).
   4. "Product" means any pre-packaged food.
2. Templates.
   
   1. Each authority is to set forth templates for labels set out in clause 4.
   2. All products imported into, distributed in, or sold in a WA state (say "state A") must carry labels set out in clause 4, providing an accurate profile of the contents of that particular product, using the templates developed by state A's authority for state A.
3. Customized labels.
   
   1. All labels are to be customized for the sapient inhabitants of that WA state.
   2. Additional standards shall be set if needed for inhabitants in different stages of their life cycles, such as infants, or if a WA state is inhabited by multiple sapient species.
   3. Each authority may require products made, distributed, or sold in that WA state carry such additional labels as it deems necessary.
   4. All labels must be prominently displayed on (or affixed to) the packaging of the product. If detailed disclosures are required, an electronic link (provided internet service is broadly available in that WA state) displayed on the packaging is acceptable.
4. Types of labels required.
   
   1. Additives labels must include all pertinent information on any additives deliberately added to the product, such as for technology, sensory, production, or other reasons.
   2. Allergies labels must include all pertinent information on any ingredients that the authority deems likely to trigger adverse reactions, such as milk and nuts, and whether the facilities that make that product also process ingredients that may trigger such reactions.
   3. Cannibalism labels must warn targeted consumers if the product involves cannibalism, such as products made for humans that include human placenta.
   4. Ingredients labels must include all pertinent information on the main ingredients of that product.
   5. Nutrient labels must provide pertinent analysis of the nutrition of the product tailored for the targeted consumer, such as energy values, proteins, vitamins, fats, and minerals.
   6. Storage labels must provide instructions on proper storage of the product (both before and after opening), taking into account the technological sophistication of the WA state and other local conditions such as weather.
   7. Technology labels must include all pertinent information on any processing technologies used in making the product, such as irradiation, dry salting, or reconstitution.
   8. Warning labels must include all pertinent information on any ingredients that the authority deems to be harmful to the targeted consumer.
5. Compliance.
   
   1. Each authority is responsible for enforcing its own regulations in its own jurisdiction, including ensuring that the labels are not materially false or deceptive through such means, such as random tests and verification from time to time, as it deems necessary.
   2. For example, if a WA state (“state A”) imports its products from another state ("state B"), state A’s authority is responsible for ensuring that such products comply with the regulations of state A.
   3. The distributors and sellers of products in WA states are jointly and severally liable on ensuring that all products sold or distributed in a WA state are in compliance with that state's regulations.
6. Database. Each WA state is to:
   
   1. collate all templates for all labels issued by the authorities in that state in an up-to-date database, including any imports from other states;
   2. ensure that the database is accessible free of charge through convenient means.

Char count: 4,456

[Simone Republic]

Draft 1

The World Assembly (WA),

Noting the frequent trade in pre-packaged food products between WA states;

Believing that consumers would be better informed if labels across products from different WA states are reasonably standardized to ease comparison, and contain pertinent information for the consumer;

The WA hereby enacts as follows:

1. Definitions.
   
   1. "Authority" means an entity designated by a WA state to be in charge of formulating and enforcing the regulations.
   2. “FDRA” means the WA Food and Drug Regulatory Agency.
   3. “Food” means anything farmed, grown, or developed for consumption by a sapient species and containing nutrients.
   4. “Nutrients” means any substance that is needed for the health and well-being of a particular sapient species.
   5. "Regulations" means all standards and requirements for templates and labelling for products according to clauses (2) to (4) as set by that state's authority.
   6. “Product” means any pre-packaged food.
2. Templates for labels.
   
   1. Each authority is to set forth templates for labels set out in clause 3.
   2. All labels are tailored for the sapient inhabitants of that WA state.
   3. Additional regulations shall be set if tailored standards are needed for sapient inhabitants in different stages of development, such as infants, or if a WA state is inhabited by multiple sapient species.
   4. All products imported into, distributed in, or sold in a WA state must carry labels set out in clause 3, using the templates developed by that WA state's authority for that WA state.
3. Types of labels.
   
   1. Ingredients labels must include all pertinent information on the main ingredients of that production, and the nutrients contained in that product.
   2. Nutrient labels must also provide pertinent analysis of key parameters necessary for the health and well-being of the consumer, such as energy values, proteins, fibers, fat, sodium, vitamins, and minerals.
   3. Additives labels must include all pertinent information on any additives deliberately added to the product, whether for technology, sensory or other reasons, such as colorings and emulsifiers.
   4. Allergies labels must include all pertinent information on any ingredients that may trigger allergies, such as lactose or gluten.
   5. Warning labels must include all pertinent information on any ingredients that may be potentially harmful, such as products containing alcohol. Such labels must also warn consumers if the products include ingredients derived from the targeted consumers’ own species.
   6. Technology labels must include important information on the technologies used in making the product, such as irradiation, dry salting, or reconstitution, and the potential health effects of such technologies.
4. Display of labels.
   
   1. All labels must be prominently displayed (or affixed) on the packaging of the product, clearly legible and tailored for that particular product (or that particular variation or packaging of that product).
   2. All labels must be in languages customarily used by that WA state (or its sub-national divisions, as appropriate).
   3. All labels must use the customary measurement units of that WA state.
5. Compliance.
   
   1. Each authority is responsible for enforcement of the regulations, including ensuring that the labels are not materially false or grossly deceptive.
   2. The manufacturers, distributors, and sellers of products are jointly and severally liable on ensuring that all products sold or distributed in a WA state are in compliance with the regulations.
   3. If a WA state (say “state A”) produces and distributes its own products, or imports its products from another state, state A’s authority is responsible for ensuring compliance with the regulations of state A.
   4. The FDRA is required to review all templates for all labels described in clauses (2) to (4) to ensure compliance with this resolution.
6. FDRA duties.
   
   
   
   1. FDRA is to collate all templates issued by all authorities in a database, provide translations between different languages used in WA states for the said database, and ensure that the database is accessible free of charge through convenient electronic and physical means, in order for consumers of products in other WA states to understand labels coming from another WA state.

Char count: 4,732

Bump

[Simone Republic]

Draft 2 published as the preceding resolution has passed as GAR 713.

[Tigrisia]

The Tigrisian delegation has several suggestions for improvement.

Additives labels must include all pertinent information on any additives deliberately added to the product, whether for technology, sensory or other reasons, such as colorings and emulsifiers.

This does not cover so-called production aids, which often still end up in the end product. We recommend to include them.

Origin labels must set out the location of manufacture of the product and contact details on the manufacturers and/or distributors of the product.

We would like to ask what constitutes the "location of manufacture" of a particular product. Often, products are produced on different sites and later combined. Would the "location of manufacture" just be the final step, even if that consists just of portioning and packaging or the whole supply chain? Where does the supply chain start? At the place of the farmer or later? In many cases, the suppliers go into the tens or more.

Technology labels must include all pertinent information on the technologies used in making the product, such as irradiation, dry salting, or reconstitution, and the potential health effects of such technologies.

We see the "potential health effects of such technologies" as a pretty broad term. Also, in many cases, there is no accurate data available on the health effect of a particular technology. Accurately depicting them on a small label is, in our opinion, difficult if not impossible. In the end, one would get a multi-page package insert for a bread.

Allergies labels must include all pertinent information on any ingredients that may trigger allergies, such as lactose or gluten.

The delegation Tigrisia sees the wording "may trigger allergies" as problematic, as many molecules can potentially trigger allergies, most of which are very rare. Some ingredients, like for example water, may trigger contact allergies but are save to ingest. Apart from that, both lactose and gluten do not trigger allergies. They trigger adverse food reactions. Allergies are related to reactions by the immune system, while adverse food reactions can be caused by many different things. For example, lactose intolerance is caused by a missing enzyme. Please note that allergies related to food are adverse food reactions, but not every adverse food reaction is an allergy. Therefore, we recommend to change the wording to "ingredients that likely trigger adverse food reactions".

Ingredients labels must include all pertinent information on the main ingredients of that product.

We would like to know why the Delegation of Simone Republic chose the wording "main ingredients", as well as which ingredients would not fall under this regulation.

Warning labels must include all pertinent information on any ingredients that may be potentially harmful to the targeted consumer, such as products containing alcohol. [/list]

Again, the wording "may be potentially harmful" is very broad. Each and every substance "may be potentially harmful" to a targeted customer, even ingredients that are necessary to stay alive, such as water. If drunken in masses, the customer may suffer from water intoxication.

For the Tigrisian Delegation at the World Assembly
Secretary for Resolutions
Thandi Enfantia
Junior Consular Secretary

[Simone Republic]

The Tigrisian delegation has several suggestions for improvement.

Additives labels must include all pertinent information on any additives deliberately added to the product, whether for technology, sensory or other reasons, such as colorings and emulsifiers.

This does not cover so-called production aids, which often still end up in the end product. We recommend to include them.

Technically production aids might also be deemed contamination depending on whether leaving it in the end is intentional, but I added in "technology, sensory, production" or other reasons instead to cover this point.

Origin labels must set out the location of manufacture of the product and contact details on the manufacturers and/or distributors of the product.

We would like to ask what constitutes the "location of manufacture" of a particular product. Often, products are produced on different sites and later combined. Would the "location of manufacture" just be the final step, even if that consists just of portioning and packaging or the whole supply chain? Where does the supply chain start? At the place of the farmer or later? In many cases, the suppliers go into the tens or more.

I changed it to "based on the product of origin laws of that state" because writing about product of origin laws would take at least another resolution.

Technology labels must include all pertinent information on the technologies used in making the product, such as irradiation, dry salting, or reconstitution, and the potential health effects of such technologies.

We see the "potential health effects of such technologies" as a pretty broad term. Also, in many cases, there is no accurate data available on the health effect of a particular technology. Accurately depicting them on a small label is, in our opinion, difficult if not impossible. In the end, one would get a multi-page package insert for a bread.

I omitted the "potential health effects of such technologies" line. Consumers can always look it up via a search engine I suppose.

Allergies labels must include all pertinent information on any ingredients that may trigger allergies, such as lactose or gluten.

The delegation Tigrisia sees the wording "may trigger allergies" as problematic, as many molecules can potentially trigger allergies, most of which are very rare. Some ingredients, like for example water, may trigger contact allergies but are save to ingest. Apart from that, both lactose and gluten do not trigger allergies. They trigger adverse food reactions. Allergies are related to reactions by the immune system, while adverse food reactions can be caused by many different things. For example, lactose intolerance is caused by a missing enzyme. Please note that allergies related to food are adverse food reactions, but not every adverse food reaction is an allergy. Therefore, we recommend to change the wording to "ingredients that likely trigger adverse food reactions".

Changed.

Ingredients labels must include all pertinent information on the main ingredients of that product.

We would like to know why the Delegation of Simone Republic chose the wording "main ingredients", as well as which ingredients would not fall under this regulation.

I went back and forth over "key ingredients" vs "main ingredients". Anyway it's to avoid de minimis scenarios. The exact laws will have to be defined by the authority.

Warning labels must include all pertinent information on any ingredients that may be potentially harmful to the targeted consumer, such as products containing alcohol. [/list]

Again, the wording "may be potentially harmful" is very broad. Each and every substance "may be potentially harmful" to a targeted customer, even ingredients that are necessary to stay alive, such as water. If drunken in masses, the customer may suffer from water intoxication.

I changed it to "the authority deems to be harmful" (so RNT instead) and not just "potentially" and changed the example from alcohol to cannabis to emphasize the point.

[Simone Republic]

Bump now that GAR 64 has been repealed by GA 716.

[Fachumonn]

Just a small note - I don't entirely appreciate you bumping all of your proposals and pushing all the others to the second page... My new proposal I posted about 2 hours ago is already basically on the second page.

I understand that you want feedback, but there's something about it that throws me off.

[Second Sovereignty]

Just a small note - I don't entirely appreciate you bumping all of your proposals and pushing all the others to the second page... My new proposal I posted about 2 hours ago is already basically on the second page.
I understand that you want feedback, but there's something about it that throws me off.

OOC:
While suddenly bumping like, a dozen of one's own threads in some kind of nightmarish legislative downpour is, undeniably, what we in the business call a dick move, it's, not really relevant to the proposal itself.

Other than that, this actually looks quite reasonable and complete; the only thing I really have to say is that the inclusion of the FDRA feels rather unnecessary. I don't think FDRA review is strictly necessary, the descriptions of the labels themselves are quite firm on what is and is not compliant, and Member-States could easily maintain databases of labels themselves.

[Bananaistan]

Just a small note - I don't entirely appreciate you bumping all of your proposals and pushing all the others to the second page... My new proposal I posted about 2 hours ago is already basically on the second page.
I understand that you want feedback, but there's something about it that throws me off.

OOC:
While suddenly bumping like, a dozen of one's own threads in some kind of nightmarish legislative downpour is, undeniably, what we in the business call a dick move, it's, not really relevant to the proposal itself.

Other than that, this actually looks quite reasonable and complete; the only thing I really have to say is that the inclusion of the FDRA feels rather unnecessary. I don't think FDRA review is strictly necessary, the descriptions of the labels themselves are quite firm on what is and is not compliant, and Member-States could easily maintain databases of labels themselves.

OOC: It's like an inescapable vortex of doom. The micromanagement is strong in Simone.

[Second Sovereignty]

OOC: It's like an inescapable vortex of doom. The micromanagement is strong in Simone.

OOC:
Oh it's very certainly micromanagement, but it's unobjectionable micromanagement.

[Simone Republic]

Other than that, this actually looks quite reasonable and complete; the only thing I really have to say is that the inclusion of the FDRA feels rather unnecessary. I don't think FDRA review is strictly necessary, the descriptions of the labels themselves are quite firm on what is and is not compliant, and Member-States could easily maintain databases of labels themselves.

I changed the database to each nation themselves.

The paragraph now reads:

[*]Database. Each WA state is to:

1. collate all templates for all labels issued by its authorities in that state in an up-to-date database, including any imports from other states;
2. ensure that the database is accessible free of charge through convenient electronic and physical means, and available in all commonly used languages of that state.

[/list]

The bit on imports is needed because the importing state is responsible for enforcing rules on labelling, not the exporting state.

The FDRA part has been axed.

Last call. This has been submitted.

[The Overmind]

A legality challenge has been issued for this proposal.

[Simone Republic]

A legality challenge has been issued for this proposal.

This has been pulled and has been re-worded as I do not want to dispute the legality challenge. Although I read the relevant resolution, I did not consider the interpretation that has been suggested in that thread. I've added additional labels on storage.

I changed the title slightly to "Pre-Packaged Food Labels".

Previous draft

The World Assembly (WA),

Noting the frequent trade in pre-packaged food products between WA states;

Believing that consumers would be better informed to make decisions on their own well-being if labels on products from different WA states are reasonably standardized to ease comparison, and contain pertinent information for the consumer;

The WA hereby enacts as follows:

1. Definitions.
   
   1. "Authority" means one or more government entities (depending on the governance structure of that state) designated by a WA state to be in charge of formulating, enforcing and interpreting the regulations.
   2. "Food" means anything farmed, grown, or developed for consumption by a sapient species.
   3. "Regulations" means all standards and requirements for templates and labelling for products according to clauses (2) to (4).
   4. "Product" means any pre-packaged food.
2. Templates.
   
   1. Each authority is to set forth templates for labels set out in clause 3.
   2. All labels are to be tailored for the sapient inhabitants of that WA state.
   3. Additional regulations shall be set if tailored standards are needed for inhabitants in different stages of their life cycle, such as infants, or if a WA state is inhabited by multiple sapient species.
   4. All products imported into, distributed in, or sold in a WA state (say "state A") must carry labels set out in clause 3, providing an accurate profile of the contents of that particular product, using the templates developed by state A's authority for state A.
3. Types of labels.
   
   1. Additives labels must include all pertinent information on any additives deliberately added to the product, such as for technology, sensory, production, or other reasons.
   2. Allergies labels must include all pertinent information on any ingredients that the authority deems likely to trigger adverse food reactions for the targeted consumers, such as milk and nuts, and whether the facilities that make that product also process ingredients that may trigger such reactions.
   3. Cannibalism labels must warn targeted consumers if the product involves cannibalism, such as products targeted for humans that include human placenta.
   4. Ingredients labels must include all pertinent information on the main ingredients of that product.
   5. Nutrient labels must provide pertinent analysis of the nutrition of the product tailored for the targeted consumer, such as energy values, proteins, vitamins, and minerals.
   6. Technology labels must include all pertinent information on the technologies used in making the product, such as irradiation, dry salting, or reconstitution.
   7. Warning labels must include all pertinent information on any ingredients that the authority deems to be harmful to the targeted consumer, such as products containing cannabis.
4. Display of labels.
   
   1. All labels must be prominently displayed on (or affixed to) the packaging of the product, and in languages customarily used by that WA state (or its sub-national divisions, as appropriate).
   2. All labels must use the customary measurement units of that WA state.
5. Compliance.
   
   1. Each authority is responsible for enforcement of the regulations, including ensuring that the labels are not materially false or grossly deceptive through such means, such as random tests and verification from time to time, as it deems necessary.
   2. For example, if a WA state (say “state A”) produces and distributes its own products, or imports its products from another state (say "state B"), state A’s authority is responsible for ensuring compliance with the regulations of state A, rather than state B.
   3. Each authority may require products made, distributed, or sold in that WA state carry such additional labels as it deems necessary.
   4. The manufacturers, distributors, and sellers of products are jointly and severally liable on ensuring that all products sold or distributed in a WA state are in compliance with the regulations.
6. Database. Each WA state is to:
   
   1. collate all templates for all labels issued by the authorities in that state in an up-to-date database, including any imports from other states;
   2. ensure that the database is accessible free of charge through convenient electronic and physical means, and available in all commonly used languages of that state.

Char count: 4,624

[Waaaar]

thank you a really good law coming back from the dead

[Barfleur]

"So this draft has been repackaged, so to speak? I see no reason to oppose."

[Refuge Isle]

Now at vote

[FlyLands]

Why is this proposal failing at the vote? I'm not seeing any problems with this proposal, and it only seems to help people by providing more information about goods. Am I missing something?

[Simone Republic]

Why is this proposal failing at the vote? I'm not seeing any problems with this proposal, and it only seems to help people by providing more information about goods. Am I missing something?

Best guess: there's a cannibalism joke (well, half a joke), and there's also a long list of compliance related checklists, and checklists are generally unpopular in the GA.

[FlyLands]

Why is this proposal failing at the vote? I'm not seeing any problems with this proposal, and it only seems to help people by providing more information about goods. Am I missing something?

Best guess: there's a cannibalism joke (well, half a joke), and there's also a long list of compliance related checklists, and checklists are generally unpopular in the GA.

Well the canabalism one actually makes sense for my nation, as canabalism is legal. Clearly labeling it instead of just putting it in the ingredients list makes it easier for the consumers to decide if they are okay with it. I also think the compliance reltated checklist make sense.

[Rominalos]

Rominalos votes in support, food management and safety is an essential part of any nation and making sure the consumers know what they are buying beforehand will bolster food safety and health.

[Shamian]

Why is this proposal failing at the vote? I'm not seeing any problems with this proposal, and it only seems to help people by providing more information about goods. Am I missing something?

Because folks are sick to the back teeth of the author of this resolution inserting a cannibalism joke into every single damn proposal they submit.

As a result of this repetitive idiocy there is now an alliance of regions who have decided to vote against anything further submitted by this author, regardless of it's content.

[Bisofeyr]

Running into the room, seemingly flustered, Norde Lot pants for a moment with his hands on his knees, thoroughly hunched over. "Why didn't anyone tell me that this was going to vote already?! I was down in the bar drinking my morning coffee, and I should have been here!" Flipping his satchel open, he takes out some crumpled notes.

"So, let me see if my understanding of several of these provisions is correct. No international treatise on this subject ought to be created to minimize the impact this resolution would have on commercial entities, given that the only authority granted the power to develop and enforce the use of these labels are on a national or lower level? And because 3(a) requires customization to each WA Member State, a commercial entity must create separate packaging for each WA Member State they sell in? That seems particularly burdensome on corporations." He scans the crumpled paper in case he misses anything, and then promptly shoves it back in his satchel; some nearby onlookers may notice that the inside of the satchel seems significantly bigger than the outside.

He pulls out a notebook seemingly entitled 'Almond and Almond-Related Concerns' and flips through a few pages, before settling on one and starting back up again: "Also, if I am to understand 2(b) and 4 correctly, every single label type is required to be fixed on every single pre-packaged food product? So, if a company wants to sell locally-sourced almonds in a pre-packaged container within a WA state, they need to note the technology used to harvest those almonds, the fact that the almonds do not involve cannibalism, unless of course the recipient is a sentient almond-person, the fact that if you are allergic to almonds you should not eat these almonds, the fact that there are no additives, and any number of additional warnings or information? Especially on foodstuffs with small packages, this could take up essentially all room which may be otherwise used for branding or promotional materials, all for warnings that need not be there. We stand opposed to this proposal, and would support a swift repeal in the case of passage."

[Fire Islands]

Esteemed fellow nations,

The Government of the Fire Islands is extremely pleased with the proposed resolution and would like to extend its gratitude towards the leadership of the nation of Simone Republic for putting forward such an excellent piece of legislation.

Internally, food labeling is an issue that we have already addressed in a manner that is largely in keeping with this legislation, so we are lucky that little adjustments will be necessary. Having said that, we understand that some nations may see difficulties in the implementation of such legislation.

In order to aid our trading partners with this process, our Ministry of Foreign Affairs, in conjunction with the Ministry of Commerce, Industry, and Trade, are steadily working on the development of an assistance program for any nation that already participates in trade with us or that may be interested in starting a trading partnership with us in the future. The aim of this program is to help fellow nations, both logistically and financially, in the implementation of the requirements set forth in this proposal.

Interest in participation in this program is to be relayed to the Firese consulate or embassy in your nation or region in order to centralize all information on the Foreign Affairs Ministry, as they are leading the charge on the development of the program.

Enclosing, once again, we are delighted that a proposal such as this one is gaining traction and reiterate our full support for it. We look forward to its passing in this Chamber.

Best regards,

Lena Myers
Fire Islands Chief of Mission to the World Assembly

[La Cocina del Bodhi]

Esteemed fellow nations,

The Government of the Fire Islands is extremely pleased with the proposed resolution and would like to extend its gratitude towards the leadership of the nation of Simone Republic for putting forward such an excellent piece of legislation.

Internally, food labeling is an issue that we have already addressed in a manner that is largely in keeping with this legislation, so we are lucky that little adjustments will be necessary. Having said that, we understand that some nations may see difficulties in the implementation of such legislation.

In order to aid our trading partners with this process, our Ministry of Foreign Affairs, in conjunction with the Ministry of Commerce, Industry, and Trade, are steadily working on the development of an assistance program for any nation that already participates in trade with us or that may be interested in starting a trading partnership with us in the future. The aim of this program is to help fellow nations, both logistically and financially, in the implementation of the requirements set forth in this proposal.

Interest in participation in this program is to be relayed to the Firese consulate or embassy in your nation or region in order to centralize all information on the Foreign Affairs Ministry, as they are leading the charge on the development of the program.

Enclosing, once again, we are delighted that a proposal such as this one is gaining traction and reiterate our full support for it. We look forward to its passing in this Chamber.

Best regards,

Lena Myers
Fire Islands Chief of Mission to the World Assembly

On behalf of all Bodhians I completely echo the sentiments of my esteemed colleague. Bodhians pride themselves in being one of the healthiest populations in the entire world, and a significant role in this is watching what we eat and making good decisions. And that is exactly what this bill will achieve. We are delighted it is up for a vote, enthusiastically vote in favor, and urge all other member states to do the same to help allow our world to become better informed and healthier.

With peace,

Jafa Union
WA Team Lead for LCD Bodhi

[Opiachus]

"No international treatise on this subject ought to be created to minimize the impact this resolution would have on commercial entities, given that the only authority granted the power to develop and enforce the use of these labels are on a national or lower level? And because 3(a) requires customization to each WA Member State, a commercial entity must create separate packaging for each WA Member State they sell in?"

Our WA delegation moderately agrees with the first set of criticisms contained in the circulated memo from Norde Lot of Bisofeyr. We think there should be an international standard set of labels and symbols within each label type. The per-state database mentioned in the proposal would be an international one. It would be similar to the common convention that a skull symbol means a product is toxic, a trefoil means a product is radioactive, and the use of the biohazard symbol. For example, there could be an international symbol for allergy warning and a standard allergy label format. As long as a product uses the international standard presentation, customization per state should be a choice by the distributor unless said state requires it. Of course, this is such a small difference from the current proposal and the per-state databases will eventually converge in content to resemble a hypothetical international database, so we are not too concerned about this. And in practice, distributors will pursue local packaging customization anyways.

"Also, if I am to understand 2(b) and 4 correctly, every single label type is required to be fixed on every single pre-packaged food product?"

We disagree with the interpretation in the second part of the memo. Our interpretation is that the label type descriptions containing "if" or "any" imply that those label types need not appear on a product when the "if" or "any" clauses are not satisfied. We believe the only required label types are ingredients, nutrition, and storage.

Overall, we are satisfied with the proposal and will vote in favour.