• Up to date information
  • On the pulse
  • Interest in our Industry
Water_image___Food_Labelling_Services_1456078980

Confusion about origin and added water labelling

The EU’s Food Information for Consumers Regulation (FIC) includes a new requirement for origin labelling where a product is voluntarily labelled with a declaration of the origin of the food but the origin of the main ingredients is different.

An implementing Act is required before this comes into force and food manufacturers are waiting to hear from the European Commission (EC) when this likely to happen.

However, Dominic Watkins, a partner and head of the food group with law firm DWF, reports that this issue is far more complex than it might at first appear.

“The general provisions about origin misleading consumers are already in force and broadly reflect what the law was previously,” said Watkins. “This provision does require an implementing Act in order to come into force, which will inevitably take time.”

Watkins added: “For this particular obligation, and as is often the case, the intent of the section, does not match the consequence. 

Meanwhile, rules within FIC governing the labelling of added water in meat products is also causing problems for meat processors and questions have been raised about how this requirement is interpreted.

Annex V1 Part A (6) of FIC states that where meat products and meat preparations have the appearance of a cut, joint, slice, portion or carcass of meat, “the name of the food shall include an indication of the presence of added water if the added water makes up more than 5% of the weight of the finished product”.

The main problem revolves around interpretation of exemptions to these rules when additional water is added for “technological reasons” during the manufacturing process.

For example, in some products, such as bacon, brine (water and salt) is required to distribute salt homogeneously. In these cases the water content could be more than 5%, according to meat processors. The question remains, would this be considered a valid ‘technological reason’ for not requiring an added water declaration?

 

You can read the full article HERE

 

Food Labelling Services comments:

There are some fundimental questions that need to have clarity on the country of origin topic before labelling of products can occur - for example, what is a 'main ingredient'? Is there a certain percentage over which an ingredient becomes a 'main ingredient' and require country of origin labelling?

With regard to the added water in meat products, the Food Labelling Regulations are clear in the percentages of added water that require the mandatory statements. However, as cited by the article, what if the water is used as a processing aid?