[GA, passed] - Pre-Packaged Food Labels

Status
Not open for further replies.
Simone

Simone

Milky white thingy
-
-
-
-
Pronouns
It
TNP Nation
Simone_Republic
ga.jpg

Pre-Packaged Food Labels
Category: Regulation | Area of Effect: Consumer Protection
Proposed by: Simone Republic | Onsite Topic​

The World Assembly (WA),

Noting the frequent trade in pre-packaged food products between WA states;

Believing that consumers would be better informed to make decisions on their own well-being if labels on products from different WA states are reasonably standardized to ease comparison, and contain pertinent information for the consumer;

The WA hereby enacts as follows:

  1. Definitions.
    • "Authority" means one or more government entities (at the national or sub-national levels) designated by a WA state to be in charge of formulating, enforcing and interpreting the regulations.
    • "Food" means anything farmed, grown, or developed for consumption by sapient individuals.
    • "Regulations" means all standards and requirements for templates and labelling for products according to clauses (2) to (4).
    • "Product" means any pre-packaged food.
  2. Templates.
    • Each authority is to set forth templates for labels set out in clause 4.
    • All products imported into, distributed in, or sold in a WA state (say "state A") must carry labels set out in clause 4, providing an accurate profile of the contents of that particular product, using the templates developed by state A's authority for state A.
  3. Customized labels.
    • All labels are to be customized for the sapient inhabitants of that WA state.
    • Additional standards shall be set if needed for inhabitants in different stages of their life cycles, such as infants, or if a WA state is inhabited by multiple sapient species.
    • Each authority may require products made, distributed, or sold in that WA state carry such additional labels as it deems necessary.
    • All labels must be prominently displayed on (or affixed to) the packaging of the product. If detailed disclosures are required, an electronic link (provided internet service is broadly available in that WA state) displayed on the packaging is acceptable.
  4. Types of labels required.
    • Additives labels must include all pertinent information on any additives deliberately added to the product, such as for technology, sensory, production, or other reasons.
    • Allergies labels must include all pertinent information on any ingredients that the authority deems likely to trigger adverse reactions, such as milk and nuts, and whether the facilities that make that product also process ingredients that may trigger such reactions.
    • Cannibalism labels must warn targeted consumers if the product involves cannibalism, such as products made for humans that include human placenta.
    • Ingredients labels must include all pertinent information on the main ingredients of that product.
    • Nutrient labels must provide pertinent analysis of the nutrition of the product tailored for the targeted consumer, such as energy values, proteins, vitamins, fats, and minerals.
    • Storage labels must provide instructions on proper storage of the product (both before and after opening), taking into account the technological sophistication of the WA state and other local conditions such as weather.
    • Technology labels must include all pertinent information on any processing technologies used in making the product, such as irradiation, dry salting, or reconstitution.
    • Warning labels must include all pertinent information on any ingredients that the authority deems to be harmful to the targeted consumer.
  5. Compliance.
    • Each authority is responsible for enforcing its own regulations in its own jurisdiction, including ensuring that the labels are not materially false or deceptive through such means, such as random tests and verification from time to time, as it deems necessary.
    • For example, if a WA state (“state A”) imports its products from another state ("state B"), state A’s authority is responsible for ensuring that such products comply with the regulations of state A.
    • The distributors and sellers of products in WA states are jointly and severally liable on ensuring that all products sold or distributed in a WA state are in compliance with that state's regulations.
  6. Database. Each WA state is to:
    • collate all templates for all labels issued by the authorities in that state in an up-to-date database, including any imports from other states;
    • ensure that the database is accessible free of charge through convenient means.
Click to expand...
Note: Only votes from TNP WA nations, NPA personnel, and those on NPA deployments will be counted. If you do not meet these requirements, please add (non-WA) or something of that effect to your vote. If you are on an NPA deployment without being formally registered as an NPA member, name your deployed nation in your vote.
Voting Instructions:
  • Vote For if you want the Delegate to vote For the resolution.
  • Vote Against if you want the Delegate to vote Against the resolution.
  • Vote Abstain if you want the Delegate to abstain from voting on this resolution.
  • Vote Present if you are personally abstaining from this vote.
Detailed opinions with your vote are appreciated and encouraged!

ForAgainstAbstainPresent
11810
 
Last edited:
Overview
This proposal seeks to create broad requirements for the proper labelling of prepackaged foodstuffs. This mandate is achieved through the imposition of various categories, such as nutritional, technological, and cannibal, for which there must be notice on the packaging. National authorities are charged with creating templates for producers or packagers of food to use.

Recommendation
This proposal’s function is to create a broad-brushed framework in which member-nations have to operate. It can’t specify individual ingredients, owing to the different biologies of the constituent species of the General Assembly, so it doesn’t try to do so. Instead, it enacts a series of general targets which each piece of packaging must meet. This has the downside of not being particularly mandatory, insofar as member-nations have quite a lot of wriggle room, but that is the only feasible way to address this topic. It is a surprisingly flexible proposal, the definitions and criteria giving member-nations room to manoeuvre and negotiate with the WACC about the details of the compliance.

For the above reasons, the Ministry of World Assembly Affairs recommends a vote For the at-vote GA resolution, "Pre-Packaged Food Labels".
 
Last edited:
Against

Since barely anything has changed from the last submission, I'll copy my previous comments over:

I maintain that this is far too specific in many of its clauses, and many of these specifics are not particularly sensible. Some of the definitions are not great (quite a lot of things are "developed for consumption by a sapient species", and a fair few of those are not really nutritious or even tangible…), and certain clauses would be rather difficult to implement given how generic they are ("Allergies" and "Technology", for example).
Click to expand...
 
nvxl:
Against

Since barely anything has changed from the last submission, I'll copy my previous comments over:
Click to expand...

Could you please provide an example of something intangible or innutritious which is developed for sapient consumption?
 
Kenmoria:
Could you please provide an example of something intangible or innutritious which is developed for sapient consumption?
Click to expand...

"Consumption" is what I was trying to highlight as problematic, which is where "intangible" comes from. In common use it can refer to many things, and has been used in such a manner in prior GA resolutions. This was not my primary concern.
 
I am in favour of this proposal. Because of the admittedly compelling reasons provided by NVXL, I will briefly explain why. This proposal’s function is to create a broad-brushed framework in which member-nations have to operate. It can’t specify individual ingredients, owing to the different biologies of the constituent species of the General Assembly, so it doesn’t try to do so. Instead, it enacts a series of general targets which each piece of packaging must meet. This has the downside of not being particularly mandatory, insofar as member-nations have quite a lot of wriggle room, but that is the only feasible way to address this topic. It is a surprisingly flexible proposal, the definitions and criteria giving member-nations room to manoeuvre and negotiate with the WACC about the details of the compliance.
 
Kenmoria:
I am in favour of this proposal. Because of the admittedly compelling reasons provided by NVXL, I will briefly explain why. This proposal’s function is to create a broad-brushed framework in which member-nations have to operate. It can’t specify individual ingredients, owing to the different biologies of the constituent species of the General Assembly, so it doesn’t try to do so. Instead, it enacts a series of general targets which each piece of packaging must meet. This has the downside of not being particularly mandatory, insofar as member-nations have quite a lot of wriggle room, but that is the only feasible way to address this topic. It is a surprisingly flexible proposal, the definitions and criteria giving member-nations room to manoeuvre and negotiate with the WACC about the details of the compliance.
Click to expand...
Thank you for the clarification. :)

For
 
The General Assembly resolution Pre-Packaged Food Labels was passed 8,213 votes to 3,430, and implemented in all WA member nations.

This is the 35th GA resolution and 37th resolution overall for that dreadful writer of low quality resolutions.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top