Food Choice and general food labelling
- Reducing the administrative burden of regulation 5 of the meat products (England) regulations (FSA) - Which? Response (PDF: 76Kb)
03 March 2010Which? stressed the importance of this Regulation for consumer protection and supported the proposed 'Option 4' which would retain important labelling provisions, but simplify industry guidance on application of the Regulation.
- Reducing the administrative burden of regulation 5 of the meat products (Northern Ireland) regulations (FSA) - Which? Response (PDF: 79Kb)
03 March 2010Which? stressed the importance of this Regulation for consumer protection and supported the proposed 'Option 4' which would retain important labelling provisions, but simplify industry guidance on application of the Regulation.
- Reducing the administrative burden of regulation 5 of the meat products (Scotland) regulations (FSA) - Which? Response (PDF: 74Kb)
03 March 2010Which? stressed the importance of this Regulation for consumer protection and supported the proposed 'Option 4' which would retain important labelling provisions, but simplify industry guidance on application of the Regulation.
- Reducing the administrative burden of regulation 5 of the meat products (Wales) regulations (FSA) - Which? Response (PDF: 74Kb)
03 March 2010Which? stressed the importance of this Regulation for consumer protection and supported the proposed 'Option 4' which would retain important labelling provisions, but simplify industry guidance on application of the Regulation.
- Fat levels in mince (FSA) - Which? Response (PDF: 53Kb)
01 August 2008Expressed concern that the proposed approach to fat levels by the FSA was not strict enough and would be weaker than enforcement practice in some cases; asked the FSA reconsider to be in line with current advice on reducing fat levels.
- Food supply chain quality schemes and branding - Which? Response (PDF: 36Kb)
11 November 2008Supported the Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board’s position that developing and investing in further assurance schemes when the Red Tractor Logo is already well established could cause more confusion for consumers.
- Proposal for a new regulation on the provision of food information to consumers (FSA) - Which? Response (PDF: 104Kb)
08 May 2008Which? broadly supported the general labelling provisions which maintain important existing requirement, clarified the objectives of food labelling and proposed new requirements that will improve the clarity and legibility of information to consumers.
- Guidance on clear food labelling (FSA) - Which? Response (PDF: 38Kb)
19 December 2007Which? recommended clearer presentation of information on front and back of pack, and improved format for nutrition information on food labels. We asked for the key elements to be mandatory requirements in the EU Directive on food information.
- Labelling guidance on country of origin (FSA) - Which? Response (PDF: 62Kb)
14 December 2007Which? set out how the FSA's guidance on country of origin labelling could be clarified. We also highlighted the findings from Which? consumer research and recommended the EU review make country of origin labelling mandatory.
- Meat products regulation and guidance (FSA) - Which? Response (PDF: 78Kb)
10 December 2007Which? is concerned about changes to requirements for meat labelling. We asked for: clarity about the presence of added proteins and starches in meat products, clarity on how regulations relate to each other, arbitrary thresholds to be abandoned.
- Guidance on the labelling of sandwiches - Which? Response (PDF: 41Kb)
01 October 2007Which? is wants the guidance to be more explicit in several places, with regards to nutrition and ingredient labelling, to ensure consumers can make informed choices about the quality and content of pre-packaged sandwiches.
- General and key principles for food labelling: A framework for the provision of mandatory food information - Which? Response (PDF: 69Kb)
11 September 2007Which? welcomed the FSA’s approach to food labelling. We outlined consumer research, stressing that the label needs to be clear and user-friendly. We see little opportunity for simplification if it means removal of mandatory requirements.
- UK national food labelling provisions - Which? Response (PDF: 44Kb)
21 August 2007Which? argued that the UK national food labelling provisions could be affected by EU proposals to replace the current Food Labelling Directive with a Consumer Information Regulation. We asked for clarifications on key regulations.
- Labelling: competitiveness, consumer information and better regulation for the EU - Which? Response (PDF: 67Kb)
15 June 2006Which? called for gaps in information, including nutrition information and country of origin, to be addressed and clarity to be improved.
- Country of origin of beef in the food service sector in Scotland - Which? Response (PDF: 59Kb)
27 February 2006Which? is supportive of the provision of information on the origin of beef used in Scotland but requested implementation by the food services industry. We also raised awareness of the potential for consumers to be misled.
- Guidance on the use of vegetarian and vegan in food labelling - Which? Response (PDF: 36Kb)
05 September 2005Which? supported guidance by the FSA on the use of the terms 'vegetarian' and 'vegan' in food labelling as sufficiently clear and unambiguous so consumers can have trust and confidence in product claims.
- Food choice - Which? Report (PDF: 685Kb)
01 January 2005Which? discussed principles of consumer choice, how they need to apply to an ever more complex and globalised supply chain, and the importance of labelling and availability and the future of food production.
- Ingredient listing and allergens (FSA) - Which? Response (PDF: 50Kb)
03 December 2001Which? welcomed the proposed list of allergens to be labelled. We are however concerned that there were still exemptions for products making up less than 5 per cent of the finished product.
- Better food labelling initiative -Which? Response (PDF: 90Kb)
22 March 2000Which? set out for the newly-formed FSA, what information should be on food labels to enable consumers to make healthier choices, how it should be presented and where information has the potential to be misleading.
PDF files require Adobe Acrobat Reader software.
