Our local Bowls Club advertised a dinner with steak and Idaho potatoes. Not having Idaho potatoes since I came to Australia I showed up at the club. Nope. No Idaho potatoes! They just tacked the name on russet potatoes and showed no contrition. Our local swim club advertised pancakes with maple syrup. Nope. No maple syrup! Just syrup with a hint of maple flavour. How syruptitiously underhanded! I am running out of toothpaste. I don’t like spearmint flavour but don’t object to other kinds of mint. In our local markets there are many brands of toothpaste. The labels contain the phrases ‘delicious minty flavour’, ‘mint-flavour’ or other designations indicating the presence of mint. Not one label specified the kind of mint. I can deal with that. I will make a mixture of baking soda and salt. Next time I go to visit family in the US I will have my Idahoes and maple syrup (not at the same meal), but I wish Australians would stop the false and inadequate labelling.

Use baking soda and salt as toothpaste and you will be gumming your Thanksgiving turkey into submission.

The wretched global companies that are most at fault for misleading advertising and labelling in the 52nd state of America come from the other fifty-one.

What about the S.O.B who labelled some left over and largely defunct munitions as weapons of mass destruction and got us into a bloody war?

This is why OLO is losing my interest.

Dear David F,

Labelling is misleading.

I totally agree.

I've now started to check the ingredients
on products, as well as their fat content,
and so on. Things that are supposed to be
"sugar free," or "Low in fat," et cetera.
How much meat is there in meat pies - and
do beef pies really contain any beef?
The list is endless. Even restaurants can
disappoint. We went to a Chinese restaurant
recently - the fried rice - was not up to
standard - it wasn't fried but steamed and
lumpy, with a few pieces of corn thrown in.
The beef in black bean sauce was uneatable -
there was so much salt in it.

We shan't be going back there.

It really pays to shop around as far as food
choices go.

Riiight. o.O

I want to see Kevin 07 back on the shelves. This Kevin 09 stuff lacks the promised tenderness and exudes what appears to be Sri Lankan curry.

Mislabelled indeed!

its called branding david...once you got a wining brand you spin on it

like..say you despiratly..want a fourth reiche...you murder those..who can/could..make the claim..but stand in your way of getting it

thus..you build on the dead...take over their id..then contuinue in your muderous ways...under..the new..neo/teutonic...zionist/bolchovics..rebranded..as victims

simply/get..a defacto..permission..like say the belfore declaration...where..a coleniser...gives..their authority..to other..to murder the local/semites..installing the bolchovic/zionist...then claim anti-semitism..while blissfully genociding-the true semites at..your leisure

branding..is a wonderous thing..you can lable..one theory science/and its opposing..not/science..and sell the lies of the theory of evolution...

or via brand-loyalty..you can play the two party-system..to serve your agenda..via both parties...same/same ..you just run the limited franchise of two..[seemingly opposing brands..appearing to go head to head..but serving the same..elite adgenda

then there is..the media...that sells us out/..by silence...and worse..by making it..sound true...feas-able,..when its only branding/labeling...knowing that by giving the dog..a bad name,..the muck sticks

brand a plant a drug ..you got a new destraction..to return to anytime..that as well as providing..a motza of income..for the treasoned acts of state...

where under a scedual..the plant is..deemed..a drug..and you keep the peace in prisons...by giving the truelly vile some druiggie to beat up on/and rape

yes..some may think your question...a slipping of some imaginative measure..others see..the wisdom..in discussing branding/lableing..in this time..of selling us..on their delusions...

look at the axis of terror...thats branding,..give a dog a bad name..you can bomb it..and all the others/..labled as dogs...back into the stone-age...blow their brains into dust..with impunity

wont get into..911 that gave the excuse..to bomb bomb iraq/spy on everyone..or the operation cast-lead..when the true intent..was dropping depleted uranium/..a known mutagen/..and phospher on them dumb arab towel heads

but who is not..the people of god...god dont belong..to one tiny nest of poisen..he belongs to us all...but by controling the holy lands you get to wholy rewrite and control the histry...

just like..when they poluted the natzi brand...just like they despoiled communism's..and socialism's brands,,,just like they destroyed capitalisms brand ...or de-moc-rat-see..demon-autocracy

Well, unfortunately it is all about 'cutting costs'.

I'm not sure about the potatos, as I would suggest that's an easy one, but when it comes to mapple syrup, the real deal is far more expensive and, as these events are fund raisers, aimed at maximising the profits for the recipient, this is the result.

You have also no doubt been to a sausage sizzle or two where the snags were crap and they used 'home brand' sauces and the cheapest bread money could buy. No butter/marg either!

But in reality, WHO CARES!

On the other hand, you can always take your own syrup if you dare not be fooled.

rehctub wrote: Well, unfortunately it is all about 'cutting costs'.

...

But in reality, WHO CARES!

Dear rehctub,

I care or I would not have started this string. It is dishonest to lie. It is not justified to do so to cut costs.

csteele

<< I want to see Kevin 07 back on the shelves. This Kevin 09 stuff lacks the promised tenderness and exudes what appears to be Sri Lankan curry. >>

I agree, 'Mislabelled indeed!' And very deliberately so. If he'd been truly sold as the less offensive duplicate of John Howard that he's always been, he would never have been elected.

Just as Howard sold himself to the electorate in '96 as the new Mr Moderate and then gradually revealed his true colours once elected, so too, the Kevin 07 campaign sold Rudd's green and progressive values to an electorate hungry for change, only to see his true ambition and pragmatism resurface once he'd won government.

Yes, sadly, Kevin 09 is the real Kevin. No need for the labelling now, it's long been dispensed with.

Thank God, we've got the Greens who don't waste time and money marketing themselves as something they're not.

David F
People like you are the reason why complience costs continue to esculate when such petty issues are taken out of all proportion for the sake of an argument.

I agree in principle that the pancakes should have been labeled as 'mapple flavoured syrup', bet really there are far more important issues to be discussed than whether or not a fund raising event should, or should not tell the people that the mapple syrup is in fact 'not the genuine article'.

Good luck with your thread, but I'm out.

Dear rehctub,

Oh, dear, people like me. We are destroying society by our insistence on such petty matters as truth in advertising. It increases costs. Toleration for unethical behaviour in small ways makes it more likely that there be corruption in big ways. I doubt that members of the Australian Wheat Board ethical in small ways would have agreed to pay illegal and unethical kickbacks to Saddam Hussein.

Dear David
It is quite easy to make a montain out of an ant hill, but seriously, go back, take a look at your initial post and the contents of your complaint, and tell me this is not a petty matter.

Real maple syrup V immitation maple syrup!

How much did you pay, $2.50?

The costs of compliance in labeling is costing businesses millions every year and, while some things are important, others are simply there due to harrassment from people trying to make a big deal out of small issues.

Now while some info is important, much is the result of an over reaction to petty issues much like the one you have raised.

Wow, I recon most of the posters on OLO would agree with me when I say again, 'WHO CARES'!

Dear rehctub,

I am bewildered. You write, "WHO CARES?" and, "Good luck with your thread, but I'm out." Obviously, you care enough to stay. Welcome back to the thread. Forum and against 'um.

Bronwyn,

I don't wish to support Kevin 0 anything specifically (all parties and the current political system sucks big time).

However, as far as I was concern, with likes of the Liberal cabal that was, Kevin even if a fizzer, was/is a better choice. Albeit a choice between a government more concerned about 'face' and legacy that real foresight and a cardboard media created face (labeling). At least his choice of political instrument is spin rather than a plumb bob in the nation's septic tank (lowest denominator).
My biggest dream is that the public start assessing the parties by policy not personality. Do we want choice or another father?

Practically speaking the current focus loses the point of REPRESENTATIVE power and making one person's self administered bowl (aka gut feel)examination the primary means of decision making.

With all the pressure being on the PM is there any wonder he/she is cautious to the point of galloping inertia ridden, symptomatic of irritable bowl syndrome. Producing policies with the substance of flatulence.

Naughty corner?

Rehctub,
Who cares? What a bad attitude for a retail butcher! Customers care!
Weren't you the one who complained about the rorts in the butchery game?

David f

What you're talking about is the common practice of 'puffing a product'. Sadly it's allowed for commercial reasons.
To me more proof that we are giving commercial interests Too much latitude.
Take all these homeopathic cures (sic) most at best have elements of benefit but cures or absolute benefits, hardly.
They don't test rigorously 'it would be too expensive to be commercially viable'. In truth the proof doesn't match the claims but it's OK for the ignorant public to waste squillions for the benefit of the vendor? Where do we draw the line between good for people and a plain rip off, for profit?

The problem is that the general public has the attitude of "aww she'll be right"

If you complain you're a whinger or a trouble maker. Well as far as I'm concerned "she'll be right" is tantamount to death of fairness by a thousand cuts. The same goes for politics to not being prepared to aim higher in attitudes. "aw it's PC or Nanny state on crystal meths and out of control". But, look what happens when they are the recipients of unfair treatment. No more nanny state "why doesn't the government do something".

The complaint arises out of the alleged incorrect menu at the local Bowls Club for goodness sakes.

Doubtless the maker of the maple flavoured syrup did not mislead the consumer and most likely the farmer who grew the spuds labelled the bag correctly, but the cook at the Bowls club ought be forgiven for a little poetic licence trying to make the pensioners supper sound more posh and appetising. It is not the same as a five star restaurant selling you a bit of a fish raised in a fish farm in Asia and calling it NQ barra is it?

Maybe to be exact the Bowls Club should have added that all meals were heavily subsidised by the pokies and priced to give their age pensioner clients a feed on their night out.

Next there will be a complaint that the number one club dish for pensioners, the fish fingers and fries is false advertising because fish do not have digits and the fries are usually chips.

There is no justification at to dump on all Australian business,viz., "I wish Australians would stop the false and inadequate labelling."

Cornflower,

sure but the issue was (deceptive) labelling. (the heading)
He's not suing anyone just raising fair, theoretical point.

I'm curious to know how you'd react if you went into a pub asked for a Scotch on the rocks and received a Bourbon on the rocks ... Do you complain over a $3.00 drink After all they are both 'whiskey'? is near enough good enough for you to be a whinger?

To someone who is used to maple syrup to be given imitation maple same argument except the meal is more expensive.

Suppose the person is allergic to a chemical in imitation syrup?
Can you guarantee that there isn't one? Good luck finding out exactly whats in one. Maple syrup on the other hand is maple syrup.

The issue is 'false' advertising where do YOU draw the line .
A commercial operation is a commercial operation whether it is a car or a bloody sauce you have a right to expect what you were promised.

Just for interest I sued a restaurant because I explained to them that my mum was allergic to all pork. They served her a dish fried in the same fat as they fried pork. Within 10 minutes her throat swelled and a MICA ambulance had to revive her on the way to the hospital.

The point is near enough is not good enough. Unless you agree that eating out should be a life or death decision. Or you don't mind being misled, cheated. It costs nothing to be accurate.

As for your comment about 'subsidy', totally irrelevant

examinator

Perhaps you are catastrophysing. This is maple flavoured syrup and a different variety of spuds in a bowls club. Any reasonable person would not expect expensive imported maple syrup in a cheap subsidised meal.

As for the 'taters, well maybe the cook was more aware than the customer that 'Idaho' is a generic term that is used for lots of different varieties of potatoes. Back where the name came from, 'Idaho' originally meant any potato grown in that State. Some think that the Russet Burbank is the 'real' Idaho, but they would be pressed to separate it from other Russet clones and maybe from many other potatoes that look around the same.

Of course if you are like me (and possibly the subject customer) and you are looking forward to a floury potato then you might be a bit let down if (say) a waxy (the texture) but otherwise delicious Nicola was served instead. Although a Nicola is probably a better potato to serve as a bake with roast.

However I do not pretend to have the eagle eye and sensitive palate that can distinguish varieties of cooked potato.

As much as I am opposed to scams in advertising and in business the examples given are trivial and unfair. It was a cheap meal in a bowls club, not the Hilton. No need to call out the hounds or damn Australian business for shonky substitution when in fact our business practices are pretty damn good by US and world standards.

david f,

You sound like you might be really homesick ?

While the things that irk you seem trivial, I imagined myself overseas and invited to a shindig featuring simple Aussie fare like Vegemite toast. I can imagine my disappointment if I bit into a some sort of Promite thing. It just wouldn't meet my expectations and I think I'd wonder how anyone aiming to present Australian tucker could get it SO very wrong.

In my observations too, Americans seem to have had a long time of exposure to an unimaginably wide range of food - I notice my friends can distinguish between berries and other fruits, veg, sauces and syrups that look and pretty much taste the same to me; meats cured different ways and all sorts of things - just like you and your potatoes. I laughed at a scene in Super Troopers where in some sort of contest one of the troopers downs a huge bottle of maple syrup - "I am ALL THAT IS MAN!!" he roars in triumph.

I love maple syrup, such as I know it. Wouldn't know whether it's some second rate mix. My palate is not too refined; I guess we're a provincial lot on the whole.

- but going back to my Vegemite scenario, I think I'd probably give myself a good talking to, to remind myself that there are whole populations starving who might live their whole lives without having one day with the food choices and availability we enjoy.

Our fussiness is, I think, an almost embarrassing testimony to our priveleged position in the world.

http://whatscookingblog.com/2007/10/31/weekly-groceries-from-around-the-world/

Anyway - get your relatives to send you what you crave :)

examinator

<< Naughty corner? >>

Well, as someone who detests toilet humour, your post did seem a bit heavy on toilet references and almost had me wondering about a spell in the corner for you. :) It was two of your other comments though that clinched it for sure!

<< Take all these homeopathic cures (sic) most at best have elements of benefit but cures or absolute benefits, hardly. >>

I've only ever tried homeopathic remedies twice and on both occasions I was extremely impressed, so I really don't like to see homeopathic 'cures' disparaged like this. :) Besides, what proportion of conventional 'cures' actually cure anything, as opposed to temporarily alleviating the symptoms?

A vile tasting but very effective homeopathic solution really helped me to stabilise fluctuating blood sugar levels at one stage, until the practitioner left the area and I moved onto other measures, which in some ways have never been as effective.

Both my dogs had very similar congenital heart conditions. The first I treated conventionally with heart and fluid tablets, which kept her alive but she was never very well. After my own favourable experience, I decided to try a homeopathic vet with the second dog and he's already a lot older than she was and doing so much better. I know there are other variables at play here, but I'm convinced the homeopathy is a major factor.

<< I don't wish to support Kevin 0 anything specifically (all parties and the current political system sucks big time). >>

All parties? I can't agree. The Greens definitely do NOT suck - big time or any other time.

Now off you go, five minutes for each transgression. :)

Dear Pynchme,

It is so true. I have lived life in a way the starving masses would envy. Yet if I don't get my maple syrup and Idahoes how does that help the starving masses in Ethiopia?

My relative's packages containing foodstuffs would be confiscated by customs. Silversides approaches corned beef. Buckwheat approximates Wheatina, and imagination helps somewhat.

I make my own spaghetti sauce and season it with herbs from our garden. I miss my grandmother's rhubarb pies and planted rhubarb. it didn't grow well. Following a season of growth the rhubarb crown becomes dormant and temperatures below 10 C are required to stimulate bud break and subsequent growth. Queensland where I live is too hot. I miss snow. On a visit to the US I stood outside to enjoy a snowstorm.

Rhubarb was found growing along the Volga by adventurous Greeks. Rhu is Greek for Volga. Barb means foreign, but Queensland is too foreign for rhubarb.

I read of the death of Don Lane and felt saddened. Another American dying on foreign soil. Tragic.

David,

I wasn't meaning that going without something would benefit anyone else directly. I meant that reminding ourselves of others helps us appreciate how wonderfully well off we are, so we feel less 'deprived'.

What you say about customs is true - I'd forgotten that.

Oh yes I too love rhubarb! Anything rhubarb is a real delight.

I have a couple of friends who send me a supply of butterfingers and a few other things, but one thing you have to admit is that Aussie jelly beans and licorice are superior - g'wan admit it - *nudge*

Maybe you could tell people to give you a (Christmas) gift certificate to this Melbourne supplier:
http://www.usafoods.com.au/

Yes - good old Don Lane. His declining years and demise are very sad events.

I think I read somewhere that he did live some of his post-talk show years in the US again; I suppose he returned to Australia when he retired or something.

His shows were a little before my time, though I saw a couple when I was very young. Also, we didn't have TV where I grew up so I only saw a few odd things when visiting the southern states for holidays.

One thing I liked very much was the way that he seemed to genuinely enjoy Bert Newton's talent. I saw him stand back and laugh with great delight while Bert did something or other to get the laughs. Don Lane was apparently self assured enough; there was no display of jealousy. People talk about American arrogance but Don Lane wouldn't qualify as an example. When he won one of his Logies, he insisted on sharing it with Bert - a lovely gesture.

Btw: Liza is out here!

Misleading labelling is one thing, but what about 'truthful' labelling of food that is designed to conceal its other less desirable features.

For example, I've noticed that avocadoes now come routinely adorned with useless little stickers that announce "No Cholesterol". Well duh - but what about the fat content?

Or jars of artichoke hearts that say "100% Fat Free", but don't mention the sodium?

Not a big deal I suppose, but it irks me too when food is marketed dishonestly.

Exam
Weren't you the one who complained about the rorts in the butchery game?
There is a huge difference between the udulterating of meat and meat substitution and immitation maple syrup V the real thing at a fund raiser!

Col
Truth in labelling has become a nightmare for the retailers, not so much myself as I don't sell pre-packed meats.

But seriously, why else do you all think food is either very expensive, or, imported. Costs, that's why!

Every batch of food now has to be sample tested so it meets the specs. This cost millions each and every year.

Also, the next time you buy that 'made in china' or wherever else, do you really think that someone on one dollar a day gives a toss whether or not the info on the label is correct everytime?

I for one seriously doubt it! Food for thought hey!

Wake up to your selves and smell the roses before you lot drive every Aussie manufacturer out of business simply because you want 'real maple syrup' on your pancakes or 'a particular brand of potato'.

David F and Examinator I agree completely.
Consumer information in this country is pathetic- easily among the worst in the Western World, and our advertising gets away with an incredible amount of liberties.

I personally don't find it a 'petty matter' to expect to be truthfully told WHAT IS GOING INTO WHAT I EAT from something I'm expected to buy.
And I can second the allergies argument too.

Personally, I'm not too thrilled about being ripped off or possibly poisoned due to corrupt practices for the SOLE reason that the people who are ripping me off are Australian.
If they're feeding me garbage or jerking me around, they don't deserve my money at all.

I naturally gravitate towards Australian-grown products (being a lot fresher coming from nearby), but have little hesitation to support foreign companies if the local ones are trying to rip me off (if Walmart came to Australia with its lower prices, I wouldn't shed a tear for Woolies and Coles at all.)

Strangely, farmers would actually get a BETTER deal if the sellers were forced to disclose their content and ratios of authentic ingredients- applejuice makers would be forced to actually buy more REAL APPLES from the growers, instead of dumping whatever cheap chemicals (and a high dose of tap water) into their vats and selling me preservative sugar-water (may contain traces of apple).

And daresay they should be FORCED to stick to a high concentration of the real ingredients they are advertising or else clearly mark their product as NOT containing the ingredient.

But strangely, instead of caring, some stupid people scared of change jump to their defense!
It seems being ripped off for no reason is "the Australian way"

King Hazza
Well I'm glad you got that load off your chest.

Just remember, we are talking about 'pancakes at a local fund raiser'.

Sure, by all means complain if your apple juce does not contain much apple, but then, did you buy the 'cheap home brand'?

Now back to the pancakes. Say they cost $2.50, would tey still sell if they had to use 'real syrup' and charge accordingly?

This whole debate is being taken out off all proportion.

Anything for an argument hey!

rehctub, what do you think about the apparently common practice of selling two-tooth hoggett as lamb?

Agree CJ- rehctub is missing the point entirely, when it's really quite simple.

The same practice of mislabelling cheap things carries across the entire food market and is just as open to exploitation in the more expensive spectrum, and is nothing but an act of corruption in what is an important part of society (consumerism).

And again- because he obviously skimmed over the points of what happens if they put preservatives or other substances in to thicken out their product that people might be allergic too- or generally bad for their health?

But I think I'm kicking a dead horse, as chances are the "answer" will just be dodging the question in any way to avert the scary "compromising true blue Aussie business" boogieman from enforcing the interests of Australian consumers and competition.

Blah!

rehctub wrote: "Just remember, we are talking about 'pancakes at a local fund raiser'".

The above is an example of the same kind of lying used in advertising.

I wrote: "Our local swim club advertised pancakes with maple syrup."

Our local swim club has a fairly expensive restaurant. It was rehctub who made it into a local fundraiser. I didn't specify any venue.

Please forget rehctub's lie.

CJ: I don't support the selling of TT as lamb, never have, never will, but, if one thinks they can buy prime lamb at a discounted price, then more fool them.

BTW, I only sell the very best of everything and charge accordingly. My lamb loin chops are $22.50Kg, cutlets $38.99kg. On the other hand, some customers preffer hogget to lamb but they deserve to know what they are buying.

King Hazza
You said; I naturally gravitate towards Australian-grown products (being a lot fresher coming from nearby), Boy, if only you knew how things in food work. For example, did you know that apples are only picked 'once every year'. They are then gassed and kept in storage for up to 12 months then sold fresh. And these are from our local growers.

I don't dodge any questions, but, I don't quite know what you are talking about. Are you referring to 'cheap imports' and my suggestion that someone earning $1 a day would not care what's in the can?

david f,
Your swim club may well have an expensive restaurant, but, is it a 'non profit' venture? If so, it's a 'fund raiser'.

Perhaps you should put forward a mothion at the next AGM to upgrade the maple syrup, you know, just like the 'cheese wheel' incident in the movie crackajack.

Also, have you bothered to look into what brand of sauce they use. Is it the cheapest money can buy or is it a quality brand? How about the coffee?

In fact, why not upgrade everything they use so the 'kids', the intended recipients of this whole venture can have less money to spend on their swimming just so the likes of you can have 'real maple syrup' on your pancakes.

Let me know when you bring this up at the AGM, I would make a special effort to be there just to see the reaction of the commity.

As I have said before, a very petty issue! WHO CARES!

rehctub wrote: In fact, why not upgrade everything they use so the 'kids', the intended recipients of this whole venture can have less money to spend on their swimming just so the likes of you can have 'real maple syrup' on your pancakes.

...

As I have said before, a very petty issue! WHO CARES!

Dear rehctub,

The likes of me has not asked for real maple syrup on my pancakes. The likes of me is concerned about lying and calling something maple syrup when it isn't maple syrup.

You bring in compliance costs. Why not simply tell the truth and say what you have and what you are selling? I don't believe lying about what you have for sale is a petty issue.

Apparently you don't believe it is a petty issue or you wouldn't keep posting and find excuses and justification for the lies while repeating. WHO CARES!

Apparently you care very much.

Dear David
I do care about labelling issues and inpropper selling of products. What I don't care about is the maple syrup issue, that's all.

Compliance costs have skyrocketed in the past 5 to 10 years. Each item must have listings like; nutritional info, fat content, ingredients, allergents etc etc. Even in our trade we must now have all cooked food sent away for testing before we can sell them. Now at around $300 a pop, this puts presure on items like, kabana, straz, hot dog franks, hams, to a point whereby many small butchers no longer make their own smallgoods which in turn opens the door for yet more cheap imports. Countries like thailand or china don't care whats on the label.

Another interesting fact is the increase in obesity. So why has this happened if we are suposadly 'better informed' on what we eat?

It is all simply yet another 'money grab' by the authorities.

Another issue is the likes of 'tomato sauce'. At what point does a sauce be allowed to be called 'tomato sauce', considering the largest ingredient in cheaper brands is water? Do you have a problem with your club calling it 'tomato sauce'? Or should they label it as 'sauce with tomatoes added'?

Where do you draw the line with labeling?

rehctub asked: Where do you draw the line with labeling?

I drew the line when I started the string and gave specific examples. Don't call a syrup maple syrup unless it is maple syrup. Don't call potatoes Idaho potatoes unless they are Idaho potatoes. I mentioned examples where there was absolutely no ambiguity involved.

That is a very simple line. Call products by the right name. There are cases where the name is in doubt but not the cases I mentioned.

David, Your following arguments, and those of your supporters are confussing a 'fund raiser' event with 'retail outlets'. I agree that truth in labeling is important in retail, although I do think it is 'over the top' in many cases and, the increase in obesity has proven this.

The fact remains that your swimming club and it's fund raisers are there for one purpose and one purpose only. To raise money for the kids swimming.

All you have done is made a mountain out of a mole hill and, if you don't beleive me, take your concerns to the next AGM and request that the commity change thier ways to suit the likes of you.

I am sure they would be thrilled to make less for the kids just so you can have your 'genuine IMPORTED maple syrup'

Let us know how you go!

Seems THIS post disappeared as well.

Anyway, rehctumb is again missing the point.

Forcing sellers to provide accurate labels (both by ingredients as david f stated, as well as domestic/overseas origins) then surely the only change that will happen is that sellers who pump out fake products will lose business only to those (domestic and foreign) who sell the sincere article, unless they drastically lower their prices- thus achieving the exact situation rehctumb insists is what we currently have.

What do we have to lose?
(except the people who rely on false advertisement).

Dear rehctub,

I confuse nothing. It is wrong to label a product incorrectly regardless of the outlet in which you are selling it.

Anyway, rehctumb is again missing the point.

Forcing sellers to provide accurate labels

No, it is you lot who are missing the point.

It's a fundraiser at a local swim club FFS!

BTW

A hot dog has nothing to do with a dog.

French fries don't come from France.

But does anyone realy care!

Take a really good look at what you are complaining about.

Dear rehctub,

It is wrong to label a product incorrectly regardless of the outlet in which you are selling it or why you are selling it.

Oh but let's be fair- we should have a law stating that sellers of foodstuffs must provide honest labeling;
EXCEPT for swim-clubs and in other similar circumstances that are "not serious enough to make a big deal about"- and thus entitled to dodgy marketing- happy now Rhectub?

That should at least make the point a little clearer now and remove your repetive need to keep trying to turn the topic back into "labelling foodstuffs is not important ..... BECAUSE iTS A SWIM CLUB!"

(Sadly I think that by making this post I will have provided him/her with a golden opportunity to pretend all of our previous posts never existed and will no longer try to address them- sorry David!) I actually predict even this post will be ignored and "It's a Swim club" will continue to be the entire basis for the anti-labelling argument.

(just to avoid confusion, I, and I assume David, are referring to the entire system of labelling food products, and not just picking on the swim club alone)

But the bright side is our posts are still there for everyone else to read, so I'm happy.

Ok guys, let's get something perfectly clear.

I have no problems what so ever with your beef about incorrect labeling of food.

However, just remember, this is a swimming club 'fund raiser' which unfortunately used the word 'maple syrup' when they, in your opinion should have used the word 'imitation', or perhaps 'maple flavoured syrup', just so the likes of you could be satisfied you were buying what you thought you were paying for.

I think Houellebecq summed it up perfectly in saying;
This is why OLO is losing my interest

Because we have petty issues like this being debated, real issues, issues that effect our very lives are not debated.

Of cause, if you lot don't like our wonderfull country, you are free to leave when ever you like. I will even throw in a complimentry IMPORTED bottle of maple syrup so you can enjoy your pancakes on the plane just in case they dare use immitation syrup.

Dear rehctub,

No matter how many times a lie is repeated it remains a lie. It was swimming club advertising. It was not a swimming club fund raiser.

If you equate objection to false labelling with denigration of Australia why don't you leave to a dictatorship where objection to anything is not allowed. Goodbye. Good riddance.

rehctub that's a bit nasty!

If you don't mind I would rather David and others stayed and as a society we went back to being Aussies with attributes likes integrity, honesty and generosity. Aussies were always known for being straight forward - no amount of dollars can buy a good character and reputation. This whole economic and social drive to grab whatever no matter who or what is exploited is making me barf.

Honesty in labelling! I'm all for it.

Thanks Pynchme.

It's sad that some people feel local businesses being held to standards of integrity (domestically) is a 'threat' to our country- ignoring that domestic farmers would be better off from it because domestic labels would becomes the most honest and gain an advantage over imported- not to mention they'd get a LOT more business as more people would actually be buying their genuine ingredients.
Even importing goods would make us higher on the radar for international trade companies- which I assumed was a good thing.

Besides, if the only authentic maple syrup comes from Thailand- I'll be more than happy to help their legitamate business and contribute my Baht.

The only people currently benefiting are the less honest sellers (and David's Swim club).

King Hazza
I am assuming you were referring to me in your last post.

Please get one thing very clear. I do not support dodgy labelling, I do however doubt the truth in a label where the manufacturer, say china, India or Taiwan, has paid their employees little more than a dollar a day.

David mentioned maple syrup came from Thailand, have you been to Thailand and seen there level of preparation standards and monitoring procedures?

This whole thread is out of control because you lot think I support dodgy labelling and I don't.

My whole angle has been that it was a fundraiser. Now, at the 11th hour, we are told it is not.

If it is not for a fund raising event and the seller is a genuine business, out to make a profit, then I agree that the correct labelling laws should apply, although, I still think this may be bordering on the extreme, to the extent that I doubt whether the authorities would have a problem with it, however, I could be wrong.

Now I hope this makes my possition clear on labelling.

Dear rehctub,

You wrote: David mentioned maple syrup came from Thailand, have you been to Thailand and seen there level of preparation standards and monitoring procedures?

I mentioned no such thing. The first mention of Thailand came from your post of Wednesday, 28 October 2009 8:00:43 PM. King Hazza also mentioned Thailand. I never did.

You also wrote: My whole angle has been that it was a fundraiser. Now, at the 11th hour, we are told it is not.

You called it a fund raiser and insisted that it was. You kept repeating the lie. However, it was a complete red herring as it is not ok to lie in the cause of fundraising.

You also wrote: If it is not for a fund raising event and the seller is a genuine business, out to make a profit, then I agree that the correct labelling laws should apply, although, I still think this may be bordering on the extreme, to the extent that I doubt whether the authorities would have a problem with it, however, I could be wrong.

You seem to have an obsession with fund raising. I don't understand why it is ok to lie about a product if it is for fund raising.

Why does there have to be a law? Can't one simply be honest? One thing you wrote that I agree with. You mentioned compliance costs. They would be tremendous if every sign, menu and advertisement were monitored for truth. What is needed is for people to feel that it is wrong to call a product by other than what it is.

Children can be taught that it is dishonest to lie about a product, and people can complain to the seller and refuse to buy if items are labeled wrongly.

Agree David- but sadly I don't think morals will be enough to stop dodgy practices, and I believe that accurate labelling and clear mention of ratio of ingredients, trans-fats and the such SHOULD be mandatory- considering we already have general content and nutrition ratings already in practice.

Besides, if the only authentic maple syrup comes from Thailand
Yes, I am sorry for that, I thought you mentioned it.

You seem to have an obsession with fund raising. I don't understand why it is ok to lie about a product if it is for fund raising.

Simple. Because fund raisers are for raising funds (usually for kids) and any dollars spent over and above come directly from the profits that would be made for the fund intended. You will not find to many supporters on your side when it comes to 'real maple syrup' V the cheaper version, when the additional costs comes from the funds raised mate!

KH
Agree David- but sadly I don't think morals will be enough to stop dodgy practices, and I believe that accurate labelling and clear mention of ratio of ingredients, trans-fats and the such SHOULD be mandatory- considering we already have general content and nutrition ratings already in practice.

So, please explain to me, that if labelling is so important in peoples decision making, why then has obesity increased in the past 10 years while labelling laws, pointing out what is in the products, have been strengthened?

Simple- most people don't excercise. And certainly there are lots of people don't care about the content.
I do care, and I deserve the right to know regardless.

It would be like voting (in another country), and saying "if voting is SO important, why do so many people not bother?"
It's a strawman.

But under this context, then there is even LESS to fear from more comprehensive labelling as there are enough consumers willing to eat it. So the hypothetical fundraisers who feel that the public don't consider their cause worthy enough if they honestly stated they were making non-authentic products can sleep easy.

Oh, and just to clarify- the only mention of Thailand was by myself- and was a purely fictional, hypothetical case of IF 'authentic' maple syrup coming from there and ALL domestic industries only manufacturing imitation stuff, I would happily buy it from them instead.
But as far as I'm aware Thailand does NOT actually make it.

And certainly there are lots of people don't care about the content.
I do care, and I deserve the right to know regardless.

We are getting off track now but yes I agree that you deserve to know if you require that info, but, why go to the expense of placing this info on every label. Why not simply have the info available at the consumers request if they so desire. It works well with sausages from the butcher.

Imagine the costs involved if we had to sample every batch of sausages made just so a nutritional pannel could be printed each time.

Again, copliance costs are huge in the food industry and much of the requirements are not neccesary as you say yourself, many people simply don't care!.

I seriously hoped you would not make such an absurd statement "If some people don't care, it shouldn't be necessary".
You know, some people ignore the warning signs on the road too- so let's not waste money installing them in the future, right?

And you ignore the fact that compliance costs are already implemented- are you saying that these will SKYROCKET if a few extra bits of information were added on top?

To compare aroad safety sign with the contens of a can of food is quite 'out there' I must say. And no, of cause I don't think road signs are not important.

What I am suggesting is that there is more to compliance costs than simply printing, or adding to, a label.

How do you think a nuti-panel is derived. By advanced testing that all costs money and ultimately adds to the cost of food.

Just remember, we are talking about 'real maple syrup' V fake. There is a huge difference between this issue and the incorrect labeling you keep bringing up.

No, it's the same issue- honest labelling of content. Whether its transfats, mostly using water instead of ingredients or maple-flavoured vs actual maple syrup, the consumer has a RIGHT to know.

The testers would simply add a more tests or write a few extra notes- hardly a big deal.

It's barely more of an inconvenience on an honest maker (or seller) compared to the testing and labelling they are already subject to- the only people that are heavily inconvenienced are those that couldn't sell an honest product.

No, it's the same issue- honest labelling of content. Whether its transfats, mostly using water instead of ingredients or maple-flavoured vs actual maple syrup, the consumer has a RIGHT to know.

CRAP! let's say we go to the icecream shop and order a big fat 'rum & Raisin' icecream, or, we buy 'rum balls' from coles at christmas.

Now, my point is, do either of these products contain 'rum'. Answer, NO!

Does anyone actually care, Again NO!

Truth in labelling is one thing, but to take it to this extreem, maple syrup on pan cakes V immitation maple syrup, you have to be kidding.

Perhaps you should go and lobby the icecream manufacturers, or, perhaps the makers of the rum ball 'pre-mix'.

Or even the local bakery where they sell 'vanilla slices' which by the way are not actually made from vanilla as the name suggests.

Or even the old 'sausage roll' which by the way is not made from a sausage.

Again, does anyone care, I doubt it!

Well if nobody cares then it shouldn't be a big deal to honestly tell them, right? now that we've established that the expenses involved in the information are already being spent

If the maple syrup isn't actually maple syrup, they should state "Maple-flavored syrup"- simple. If there is a reasonable expectation of a product labelling indicating a literal use of the product in the name it SHOULD actually have that product- it's not a lot to ask- unless its somebody peddling garbage.

But according to you, misleading consumers is ok because a large portion of them might not care either way?

What a good standard to set....

Well I'm happy to agree to disagee.

But, it was you who wrote this line, not me ;And certainly there are lots of people don't care about the content.

Please don't blame me for this statement as I do care about correct labelling and missleading advertising, WHEN IT MATTERS!

Finnally, am I to assume that you have no issues with the ingredient 'rum' being used to advertise a product, when in fact it is 'immitation rum', or more so, 'rum essence' that is used.

Please tell me the 'pancakes' and 'rum' issues are the same, and please, don't make the world ruin these icconic delights (rum & Raising icecream & rum balls) just so you lot can be assurred of exactly what you are buying.

I say again, this is a petty issue, and deep down I think you lot know it.

Ruining iconic delights by accurate labelling?

Sorry Rectub but this conversation is getting lamer and lamer with you desperately trying to grasp any excuse you can use why honest labelling is a bad thing- and so far, nothing convincing.

I personally have no idea what Rumballs are- but if Rumballs have a standard make of using REAL RUM, then yes, they should be labelled as such (Flavored Rumballs, for example). However, if a food item like a hotdog, which is long and well known to not be made out of dog but either pork of beef, then it can be called a pork or beef or tofu hotdog (or some other name if it contains neither or less than 90 percent- with mentions of MSG etc. The bread can do without labelling unless its content deviates from standard flour, and the ketchup can be labelled "Tomato" or "Flavoured" ketchup.

So if you were to go to a hotdog outlet, the title could be Pork-flavored Hotdog with Artificial Ketchup. (with a subtitle about preservatives and MSG). Not hard, considering McDonalds and most Chinese Restaurants feel its easy enough information to provide- and willingly.

It's not an inconvenience, it gives farmers MORE business as sellers are motivated to actually buy their stuff instead of buy cheaper phony ingredients, and the only people that lose are those very sellers in favor of more honest sellers. And it basically can apply to any foodstuff that is judged to have a name implying something else to customers than what it really is (the name Hotdog, obviously not being one of them).

Simple issue.

Well I think we have come to the end of the road as you and your supporters have confussed 'labelling' with 'advertising' which has resulted in you manking a 'mountain out of a mole hill'.

The fact remains that rum and raising icecream and 'rum balls', (not the home made type) do not contain rum and we widely accept this. How could they, kids would be addicted to them!

So to suggest that the use of imitation maple syrup is incorrect labelling is wrong, unless of cause you wish to change everything else that is wrong and, if you cared to ask the attendent at the swim club if the maple syrup was 'the real thing' they would have most likely said 'no'!

Whinge for the sake of whinging I think!

Why not? It's no effort for a company to write "Maple flavoured Syrup" on their product, at all- not even your hypothetical "David's swim club".

To me it sounds like a paranoid clinging to the status quo. Because enforcing some standards would 'rock the boat' too much.

Correct labelling, advertising etc would only benefit Australian consumers- and your supposed situation of artificial products on the lower price bracket and genuine, 100% products on the higher would actually be true- instead of manufacturers just making fake stuff and trying to pass it off as legit.

I don't see what the problem is...