Page 481 - Week 02 - Tuesday, 21 February 2012
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Yes, we support this legislation today. There are gaps in terms of information and how it is going to be implemented, and they need to be addressed. We need to be assured that this legislation will be effectively implemented on the ground, because the Auditor-General has told us that the current regime is not. We support this bill with those quite significant caveats.
MS BRESNAN (Brindabella) (11.23): The ACT Greens will be supporting the Food Amendment Bill. The ACT Greens believe that when a person buys a food product, they should be assured of its quality and safety, and we are keen to see improvements in the regulatory system which prevent unsafe food from being served. There have been some alarming cases locally regarding safety in the last few years, with people becoming ill. Other jurisdictions have strengthened a consumer’s right to know about a food provider’s safety record and it is right that the ACT should do the same. The legislation today provides some clear reforms that, while not as extensive as those of other jurisdictions, will provide consumers with more information.
The ACT Greens agree that closure notices should be prominently placed on a food provider’s premises if and when they are closed because they have become a risk to public safety. One important consideration with the closure notices is what they will actually look like and say. It was not entirely clear from the bill whether the information would be provided in plain English.
ACT Health provided a briefing on the bill, as Mr Hanson mentioned, which was very helpful, and we thank them for that briefing. Examples were provided of closure notices used overseas that ACT Health was seeking to replicate. The signs were fairly easy to understand, and it was clear that ACT Health recognised the need for plain English notices. The ACT Greens support the legislation’s proposed requirement for food providers to have someone from their business qualified as a food safety supervisor. Some of the food safety issues that have occurred in recent years have been because of a lack of awareness on behalf of food operators, and significant education is needed within their businesses if they are to comply with food health and safety laws.
While there will be compliance costs for private businesses associated with this move, in that businesses will have to pay for someone from their organisation to undergo the prescribed training, it appears that this is a necessary step across the food industry for compliance rates to improve.
A benefit with regard to costs, however, is that the introduction of food safety supervisors will reduce the amount of resources ACT Health needs to spend on educating and warning businesses about food safety, as more businesses will be aware of the food safety standards that they must adhere to. A degree of flexibility will, of course, be required around small businesses, in that a food safety supervisor may sometimes be away on leave or there may be turnover in a small number of staff. I am, however, satisfied from the ACT Health briefing that this concern will be considered during the implementation phase and that ACT Health has experience in dealing with this kind of situation.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video