Question on Notice regarding the national standard for free-range egg labelling, specifically questioning the rationale behind the chosen stocking density and the weight given to industry submissions over consumer sentiment. The Minister's answer largely deflects responsibility to the Commonwealth Treasury and refers to the decision-making process outlined in the regulation impact statements.

AnsweredQoN 358Legislative Council
Asked
7 April 2016
Portfolio
Commerce

QuestionView source ↗

FREE-RANGE EGG LABELLING — NATIONAL
STANDARD
358. Hon LYNN MacLAREN to the Minister
for Commerce:
I refer to the agreement by
Australian and New Zealand consumer affairs ministers at the Legislative and
Governance Forum on Consumer Affairs to a national standard on free-range egg
labelling.
(1) What
proportion of submissions called for the standard to be a stocking density of 1
500 hens per hectare?
(2) What were the
reasons articulated for the forum decision that the standard would be 10 000
hens per hectare?
(3) What was the
purpose of the consultation if the forum had no intention of taking consumer
sentiment aboard and instead gave more weight to the industry submissions?
(4) Can the minister
please advise what other considerations overrode the findings from the Treasury
consultation that was conducted over a six-month period and at great expense to
the taxpayer?

AnswerView source ↗

I thank the honourable member for
some notice of the question.
(1) Commonwealth
Treasury was the agency responsible for coordinating the public consultations
associated with developing a national information standard for free-range egg
labelling. I am not aware of the proportion of public submissions that called
for a stocking density of 1 500 hens per hectare.
(2) The
Legislative and Governance Forum on Consumer Affairs reached a consensus
decision consistent with the preferred option and recommendations made in the
decision regulation impact statement on free-range egg labelling.
(3) The
consultation regulation impact statement was released for public comment.
Following receipt of and analysis of all submissions, a decision regulation
impact statement was prepared having regard to the costs and benefits of each
of the options that guided CAF ministers in reaching their consensus decision.
(4) See answer to (3).

Explore WA Government Data

Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.

Explore more