Growing number of recalls put food labelling in spotlight

Mark Dixon.
Mark Dixon.
A spate of supermarket food recalls has called into question our reliance on food labelling, says Allergy NZ.

Last year there were 74 instances where packaged food was sent back to the manufacturer or binned, up 11% from 66 recalls in 2018 and well up on the 53 recorded in 2017.

There were fewer than half the number of recalls over the previous two years.

Allergy NZ chief executive Mark Dixon said the numbers reflected increased consumer vigilance as well as the teeth to enforce the Food Act by New Zealand Food Safety, an arm of the Ministry for Primary Industries.

‘‘There has historically been a dismissive attitude among both local and international food suppliers and supermarkets, who would prefer to sweep any labelling or other issues under the carpet.

‘‘These days, manufacturers and food outlets react and they react quickly, so that is the silver lining around enforcement of the terms of the Food Act.’’

He said the willingness of MPI to act on a legal basis had also motivated companies to clean up their act, by fixing ‘‘sloppy practice’’ before product left the manufacturing plant.

The prosecution of small goods company Hellers in late 2018, over mispackaged cheese sizzlers, had served as a case in point, he said.

In January last year the company was fined almost $40,000, with an additional $15,000 in reparation, after its mislabelled products caused mild to severe reactions in three children who were allergic to milk products.

Jimmy’s Pies was also taken to task by MPI in late 2018 after a reaction to MSG in its pies, resulting in the recall of batches of brand mince and mince and cheese pies.

Following the incident, the Roxburgh-based company decided to streamline its product and ingredient list, concentrating only on its two biggest sellers and simplifying packaging requirements.

‘‘I think that was a wake-up call to smaller manufacturers, in particular, which really can’t afford that kind of cost, not to mention brand damage,’’ Mr Dixon said.

An MPI spokeswoman said prosecution was generally used as a last resort.

‘‘Actions can range from education and advice, through to directed enforcement action which could include instructing a business to stop selling the non-complying product,’’ she said.

Outside of undeclared allergens such as milk or gluten, the industry was also more aware of poor packaging practice which could see consumers bite into plastic, metal or even glass.

Last year, Pak’n Save Dunedin and a further five Pak’n Save supermarkets around the country pulled meat mince products from their shelves because they contained trace amounts of plastic.

Plastic in beef or pork mince products was also discovered and removed at New World Dannevirke and Fresh Choice Omokoroa.

In December Foodstuffs Own brands removed all batches, dates and flavours of its Pams brand Dairy Dessert — also due to plastic pieces — while Lewis Road disposed of a batch of its chocolate ice cream in August for the presence of metal.

Late in the year Australian wine brand Brown Brothers withdrew some of its King Valley Prosecco Rose and Villa Maria disposed of a batch of its lightly sparkling rose 2018, both for potential glass contaminants.

‘‘The silver lining is that we are catching more of these issues, so importers and local manufacturers now understand they need to be more attentive to the quality of their product, their packaging and their labelling,’’ Mr Dixon said.

But, he said, NZ Allergy’s biggest concern remained around undeclared allergens.

Last year, the unlisted presence of milk was at the heart of a spate of chocolate product recalls — 15 in total — which affected Wishbone brand Paleo chocolate bites, Loukoumi brand hot choc on a spoon, Equagold’s Belgian style Couverture and all flavours of the Wanaka chocolate brand.

The presence of gluten resulted in the recall of Woodburn brand venison burgers and Supa Food brand sweet soybean sauce pork, while sesame seed was found in Multigoods’ Haidilao brand butter hot pot seasoning and Uni-President soup instant noodles, which offended across a host of undeclared allergens including soy, egg, fish and sesame.

The New Zealand Food and Grocery Council (FGC) said while removals of this nature were virtually unavoidable, it was costing New Zealand's biggest manufacturing sector millions.

Recalls are a ‘‘fact of life’’ in food manufacturing, says FGC chief executive Katherine Rich.

‘‘Even with the best systems in place, from time to time manufacturers have to call their products back to the factory.

‘‘Reasons vary, from labelling issues and undeclared allergens to manufacturing faults.’’

She said most issues would be related to human error of some kind, which was believed to be the issue in the Hellers case.

‘‘Every manufacturer works hard to avoid recalling product but it does show that the food safety system is working by identifying problems or faults, acting quickly and retrieving products from shelves before they are consumed,’’ Ms Rich said.

She said a FGC member had recently been asked to pay $60,000 to an Australian supermarket chain for a nationwide recall.

‘‘These sorts of sums can potentially put small companies to the wall.''

A former food company executive said accurate ingredient labelling by large suppliers was a major issue.

‘‘Commercial food contract manufacturers are often dealing with hundreds of ingredients and different product ranges on a daily basis, so no matter how good your risk systems are, there has to be an element of trust in the supply chain.''

Mr Dixon said another emerging issue was a trend towards adding the ‘‘may contain’’ disclaimer on the packaging.

‘‘We would like to see this changed. Manufacturers need to know precisely what is in their product and not try to cover themselves by adding in a proviso just to cover all the bases. This doesn’t help the consumer, particularly those with allergies who need a clear ingredient list.’’

He advised people with allergies to register for latest recall advice on the MPI website.

brent.melville@odt.co.nz

Comments

What would be nice is the country of origin. Just saying 'imported' is so lame. There are countries that I want to avoid, whilst there are others that have a good farming environment that I want to support. Why does not the government bat for the consumer and force useful information on labels? Most manufacturers always want the cheapest supplier- which may be from a polluted country.