The Siggins Miller evaluation reported that both Could potentially increase variation in pregnancy industry and public health sectors support a minimum warning labels in the market with some industry groups standard set by government for consistent content, size, following the status quo, and others adopting the new and placement of pregnancy health warning labels. style guide. Opportunity for communication experts, the public and Cost and workload for Government to develop the style consumer and public health organisations to have input guide. into Government style guide. Some industry groups (a minority) that submitted to the targeted consultation have indicated support for this option. Option 2- Opportunity to address the issues identified in this Cost to industry for compliance (the extent of which Mandatory paper such as consumer misunderstanding, will depend on how the requirements in the proposed contradictory messages and requirement to visit a Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code compare website. to current industry practices). Level playing field for industry as all industry need to For producers of smaller packages (e.g. 50ml bottles) it comply with the mandatory requirements. may not be physically possible to accommodate a pregnancy health warning without substantial change to Open and transparent process for establishing the the current package / labelling. requirements for pregnancy warning labels. Increased workload for regulators. Consistent with other pregnancy advice on food labels such as formulated caffeinated beverages and Cost and work for Government to introduce mandatory formulated supplementary sports foods which require labelling into the Australia New Zealand Food mandatory statements to advise that the products are not Standards Code. recommended/suitable for pregnant women. Would require imported products to comply with the Consistent with the way other teratogens such as Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code tobacco and some medications are required to carry requirements. mandatory warning labels. Would require notification to the World Trade The Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code Organisation. However, there are clear public health applies to both Australia and New Zealand and
The Siggins Miller evaluation reported that both industry and public health sectors support a minimum standard set by government for consistent content, size, and placement of pregnancy health warning labels. Opportunity for communication experts, the public and consumer and public health organisations to have input into Government style guide. Some industry groups (a minority) that submitted to the targeted consultation have indicated support for this option. Could potentially increase variation in pregnancy warning labels in the market with some industry groups following the status quo, and others adopting the new style guide. Cost and workload for Government to develop the style guide. Option 2- Mandatory Opportunity to address the issues identified in this paper such as consumer misunderstanding, contradictory messages and requirement to visit a website. Level playing field for industry as all industry need to comply with the mandatory requirements. Open and transparent process for establishing the requirements for pregnancy warning labels. Consistent with other pregnancy advice on food labels such as formulated caffeinated beverages and formulated supplementary sports foods which require mandatory statements to advise that the products are not recommended/suitable for pregnant women. Consistent with the way other teratogens such as tobacco and some medications are required to carry mandatory warning labels. The Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code applies to both Australia and New Zealand and Cost to industry for compliance (the extent of which will depend on how the requirements in the proposed Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code compare to current industry practices). For producers of smaller packages (e.g. 50ml bottles) it may not be physically possible to accommodate a pregnancy health warning without substantial change to the current package / labelling. Increased workload for regulators. Cost and work for Government to introduce mandatory labelling into the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code. Would require imported products to comply with the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code requirements. Would require notification to the World Trade Organisation. However, there are clear public health
pregnancy_warning_labels_on_packaged_alcoholic_beverages_decision_ris.docx