Senate could extend its farm gate price enquiry to cover eggs

It's a pity that the current Senate inquiry into farm gate milk prices isn't extended to also cover the treatment of farmers in the egg industry. Political interference in the definition of free range eggs has created a massive platform for consumer deception and unfair competition. Ministers for Consumer Affairs got it wrong when they allowed an intensive stocking density for free range egg production. The Model Code of Practice recommended a maximum outdoor density of 1500 hens per hectare but the Ministers approved a density of 10,000 hens without taking account of planning laws which treat intensive farming operations as feed lots with restrictive planning regulations. They also ignored rulings by Federal Court justices in cases of deceptive conduct over egg labelling. False assertions were made by major players in the egg industry that no maximum stocking density was set in the Model Code of Practice for the Welfare of Animals (Domestic Poultry). The industry cobbled together an amended code which they peddled as the real thing and claimed that it showed no maximum stocking density. They included in the main body of their version of the code, an edited item from the Appendix which they said allowed unlimited stocking densities. The actual Appendix states at 2.1.4 “The maximum acceptable densities for free range birds For layer hens a maximum of 1500 hens per hectare.” Then it refers to meat birds.”Meat chickens, a proportionately higher stocking density than for layers may be used.” The intent is crystal clear but in their dodgy version of the code, the industry left out all references to ‘meat birds’. The plan was clearly designed to deceive Ministers and con them into accepting that the Model Code did not establish a maximum stocking density and to accept their arguments and those of the major supermarkets for a 10,000 hen per hectare density. The Senate could trawl through all the deception and bring some certainty to farmers and consumers.

ACCC may ignore Ministers' new 'Free Range' standard

Great news for free range egg farmers. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission is ignoring the intensive 'free range' egg standard approved by Ministers for Consumer Affairs and may press ahead with prosecutions against producers who breach the standards identified in Federal Court decisions. In its Enforcement Guidance for the egg industry on Free Range claims, it says “use of the descriptor ‘free range’ requires, at least, that the hens are able to move about freely on an open range on most days, and that most of the hens do so. the ACCC rejects claims by some that it is OK to tell consumers that the eggs are from free range hens when the outdoor range is not regularly used by the hens because the farming practices are such that the hens stay indoors all or most of the time. Producers do not have to use the label ‘free range’. Producers choose to describe their eggs as free range to promote their products and consumers are generally willing to pay a premium for free range eggs. it is open to producers to market their eggs under different labels, such as barn-laid or cage-free, where their practices do not meet consumer expectations for free range.” It's a pity the Ministers for Consumer Affairs and the federal Small Business Minister are too dumb to understand the problem.

Final submissions on 'free range' standard

Final submissions are being sought on the free range egg standard adopted by Ministers for Consumer Affairs/Fair Trading, which allow producers with up to 10,000 hens per hectare to label their eggs as free range. Here is part of the submission we have made: "We believe that the information standard on free range eggs adopted by Ministers is contrary to the interests of the industry and consumers. The standard allows intensive production systems to be classified as free range and appears to directly conflict with specific rulings by Federal Court justices in their decisions on cases of deceptive conduct brought by the ACCC. The new standard simply allows unscrupulous producers to continue to mislead customers. Loopholes in the standard ensure that almost any excuse can be given for keeping hens locked up, but we believe that the term ‘regular and meaningful access to the outdoors is too vague anyway. Major producers are laughing at how easy it was to con the ministers into accepting what they wanted. There is no mechanism for checking each operation – so it would have been more effective to leave things as they were and let the ACCC launch prosecutions. Adopting the Model Code of Practice for the Welfare of Animals (Domestic Poultry) would have been a more realistic standard. We have attached a document detailing how the Model Code was developed and the reasons for a maximum stocking density of 1500 hens per hectare. A fully grown laying hen produces half a cubic metre of manure a year – so at a stocking density of 10,000 hens per hectare, the land will be covered by 5000 cubic metres of manure each year – far above the limits of sustainability. Chicken manure has the highest levels of nitrogen,phosphorus, and potassium of all manures, it will likely render the land useless for farming within a few years. Contamination of groundwater and water courses is also likely". Submissions on the free range standard can be made electronically at australianconsumerlaw@treasury.gov.au;