When I buy a bottle of fresh orange juice, I can be confident I am getting what I pay for. But when I buy a bottle of pale ale, I can’t be so sure.
Product labelling laws here in New Zealand are protected by the Commerce Commission. The Fair Trading Act (FTA) requires manufacturers to describe their products accurately in advertising, packaging and labelling. Breaching the FTA can lead to fines and imprisonment, but more often, the Commerce Commission simply requires companies to correct their ads and make sure it doesn’t happen again.
For some reason, the fruit juice industry has attracted a lot of Commerce Commission attention. Since 2002, the Commission has investigated at least 12 juice manufacturers. As a result, many agreed to change their labels, often over claims that the juice was freshly squeezed, rather than made with pulp. The Commission has also reached settlements with wine makers, typically over regional labelling.
The two major brewers have both breached the FTA in the past. In 2001, DB Breweries changed Tui and Monteiths labels after it admitted its claims they were brewed in Mangatainoka and Greymouth were liable to mislead consumers.
The same year, New Zealand Breweries admitted a similar breach of the FTA over claims Speights was all brewed in Dunedin. As part of the settlement it was required to change labelling, publish corrective newspaper ads, and provide retailers with point of sale notices clearly informing the public that canned and bottled Speights was made in Christchurch and Auckland. Remember them? I don’t.
While place-of-origin labelling has been challenged, I am not aware of any challenge made to the misleading use of beer styles. It seems to me that it is possible to label a beer as anything that will sell, rather than providing consumers with an accurate description of the product they are paying for. We all know of labels that are completely inaccurate descriptions of the beer within.
Don’t get me wrong. I’m certainly not suggesting that all beer should be made to a specific style – innovation is good. I am not suggesting that every beer should have to be labelled with a style. I’m just saying that when a beer is advertised or labelled as a certain style, it should be an honest effort at that style of beer.
In a settlement with a winemaker, the Commerce Commission said: “Wineries need to ensure their labelling is accurate – not only regarding place of origin, but also in relation to varietal, vintage, and general representations made about their wine.” Are comparable standards applied to beer?
In 2007, Consumer magazine raised the issue of misleading labelling. This came after a beer tasting where beers were categorised according to their label, rather than letting brewers choose the appropriate category. This is standard Consumer practice, and is similar to the approach it takes in testing wine and other products. (I was a judge at this tasting, as was Geoff Griggs).
Some brewers told Consumer that their ‘ale’ should have been compared with draughts rather than ales – a brave admission given Consumer’s pursuit of consumer laws. Consumer responded to say, “A beer should taste like what it’s claimed to be, regardless of how it’s brewed. We think it’s time the industry labelled their products true to style.”
Consumer approached SOBA, and it said, “We deplore the practice of blatantly mislabelling beers as different styles simply because the marketing department thinks it will assist sales. This practice is damaging to brewers who correctly brew a style, and perpetuates the long-held myth that all beer tastes the same.”
So why is mislabelling a problem? As a consumer I have a right (under the FTA) to know what I am buying before I hand over my beer money. Secondly, brewers with diverse ranges need consumers who know what to expect from, say, a pale ale, saison, doppelbock or radler. These are product descriptions, not marketing terms.
I believe brewers who enter commercial competitions in categories that contradict their advertising and labelling are facing a real risk of attracting Commerce Commission attention. They shouldn’t expect to win awards in one category while telling customers they are paying for something else. Coz that would be breach the law, wouldn’t it?
Wow of the week – Hallertau Minimus. This is one flavoursome session beer. Heaps of fresh New World hop aroma and flavour, and less than 4% ABV. Minimus sets the benchmark for delivering flavour without pushing the alcohol.
And finally, if you want to support a brewer who is making the world a better place, help Harrington’s Breweries’ Carl Harrington raise money for leukaemia research here.
Cheers!
Follow us on Twitter @nzbeerblog
©Martin Craig 2010. Reproduction with permission.
[email protected]
Filed under: Beer Makers, Gushing forth | Tagged under Commerce Commission, craft beer, DB Breweries, dobbelbock, Fair Trading Act, fresh juice, Hallertau, Harringtons, Marrowthong, Minimus, mislabelling, Monteiths, New Zealand Beer, Pale Ale, radler, saison, SOBA, Speights, Tui | 7 Comments »