13 February 2018

Members noted results from the monitoring of consumer awareness, attitudes and interaction with the Health Star Rating (HSR) system in Australia. The HSR is now the most well recognised food logo when prompted and the second most frequently identified food logo unprompted. Over two-thirds of respondents had recently purchased a HSR product and almost two-thirds reported that their confidence in the system is high or somewhat high. Members agreed that the results, in general, indicate that consumer trust in and understanding of the HSR system is improving. Members also agreed that the results demonstrate the success of the social marketing campaigns accompanying the implementation of the HSR system.

Members noted the update on the monitoring of the HSR system in New Zealand. At the end of the quarter to December 2017, over 3,700 products carried a HSR.

Members endorsed the wording of a revised HSR key messages/media protocol, to be used by HSRAC members when approached by media and other stakeholders. Members also discussed appointing a prominent spokesperson who could work as a ‘champion’ for the HSR system in the public domain.

Members noted the outcomes of the 24 November 2017 meeting of the Australia New Zealand Ministerial Forum on Food Regulation (the Forum), particularly the agreement to the delivery of the final five year review report to the Forum in late 2019 and the agreement to the replacement nominees and continuing member on the HSRAC.

Members viewed several formats of new creative materials for a forthcoming HSR system marketing campaign. This material will promote consumer understanding of the HSR system, particularly comparing products within categories. Members also noted that complementary media strategies are also being pursued.

Members noted that the HSR Technical Advisory Group is currently conducting modelling to inform a discussion paper on the ‘as prepared’ rules issue, as previously requested. Members also considered a ‘decision tree’ which may guide food manufacturers/retailers in their interpretation of the ‘as prepared’ rules.

Members noted an update on the progress of the five year review. Workshops are underway, with several strong themes already identified: defining and monitoring ‘success’; communications; governance; and problem identification and system enhancements. As part of a commitment to the real and perceived independence of the five year review, Members agreed that it would be useful to include on the HSR website a short blurb or diagram highlighting reporting structures for the five year review. Members noted that any changes to the HSR system will need to be considered in sum and with consideration given to practical implementation and consumer perception.

Members noted a letter sent to the Chair by The George Institute regarding protein powders and bars and similar products, which are considered to be Formulated Supplementary Sports Foods. Members agreed that the marketing of such products as for a specific use (i.e. as a sports food) is the key consideration and therefore, in accordance with HSR system guidance documents, these products should not carry a HSR. Members acknowledged that there may be products within this category and marketing efforts which blur the boundaries of ‘sports foods’ and 'general purpose foods’, however it was agreed that the HSR system guidance is clear in this instance.

15 November 2017

Members noted that as at October 2017, in Australia, there were about 8,400 products that have displayed the Health Star Rating (HSR) system graphic representing over 150 companies. Members also noted that, in New Zealand, the number of products on shelf that displayed the HSR system graphic for the July to September 2017 quarter was over 3,500.

Members also noted the pleasing results from the most recent monitoring activities undertaken by the National Heart Foundation of Australia which indicate that uptake is continuing to increase and adherence to guidance documents is high. Consumer understanding of the HSR system has continued to increase and most Australians view the HSR system as easy to understand (74%), easy to use (75%) and agree that it makes choosing food easier (62%). Two thirds of Australians have high confidence in the system.

In relation to the ‘as prepared’ issue, Members agreed that status quo cannot continue as a viable option due to the negative media that has developed around this issue and particular products; ‘as sold’ does not allow meaningful comparisons; and allowing multiple HSRs on pack is the least preferred option by stakeholders. Members agreed that ‘as sold’ with specific limited exemptions appears to be the most viable option and that the exemptions of rehydration with water, dilution with water and draining of water should be explored. Members agreed that the Technical Advisory Group (TAG) should model these exemptions and that a discussion paper incorporating the outcomes of the modelling of this option should be developed for the second round of ‘as prepared’ consultations, currently expected to take place in Quarter 1, 2018.

Members also agreed that the possibility of developing a mechanism to guide companies’ decisions on whether to use the HSR labelling ‘as sold’ or ‘as prepared’ would be explored.

Members noted a verbal update from the Social Marketing Advisory Group Chair on the progress in developing the next phase of the campaign with testing of new creative concepts being recently completed. Members also noted that engagement through social media, particularly Twitter, has been successful over the last year and these activities will continue.

Ms Andrea Matthews from mpconsulting provided a verbal update on activities undertaken to date in relation to the five year review of the HSR system. Ms Matthews advised that mpconsulting has had initial discussions with many stakeholders as part of the first stage of consultation. There was some discussion around the face to face consultations that will occur as part of stage two of the consultation (February to April 2018) and the format of a navigational paper which will be made available to stakeholders prior to the forums.

Members noted an update on TAG activities from the TAG Chair. The TAG Chair advised that the TAG has begun looking at ratings across Australian Guide to Healthy Eating categories and identified some categories that required further consideration. Some of this category work is reliant on additional product data from industry which has been requested and is expected shortly.

The TAG Chair also advised that the TAG has developed a reporting template which will be used for technical reports and that some issues have been allocated to TAG members to commence writing up. It was noted, however, that as there may be flow on effects from modelling that is completed in the future, for example on specific nutrients, it may be necessary to re-evaluate these issues once this further modelling is completed.

The TAG Chair also indicated that the TAG has commenced discussions about incorporating added sugar versus total sugar in the HSR system. Early indications are that the data gathering required to inform the analysis is a challenge for industry as this information is not routinely gathered by companies and there is no agreed definition for ‘added sugar’.

Members discussed a product clarification enquiry in relation to carob and whether it is eligible to score V points under the HSR system. Members agreed that carob should be treated in the same way as cacao beans and is therefore not eligible to score V points. Members agreed that carob is used in confectionery and in other ways that are similar to cacao and does not provide sufficient nutritive value to justify scoring V points.

8 August 2017

Members noted that as at April 2017, in Australia, there are about 7,500 products displaying the HSR graphic representing about 150 companies. Members also noted that, in New Zealand, the most recent data indicates there are about 2,800 products displaying the Health Star Rating (HSR) graphic with this number steadily increasing.

It was also noted that Ms Jenni Mack is resigning from her position as the consumer representative on the HSRAC and that this was her last meeting. The HSRAC Chair thanked Ms Mack for her significant contribution over several years including during the development of the HSR system. A replacement member will be referred to the Australia and New Zealand Ministerial Forum on Food Regulation for decision.

Members were advised that the public submission process on the form of the food (‘as prepared’) rules in the Guide for Industry to the HSR Calculator has closed and 74 submissions were received. A draft ‘as prepared’ discussion paper and draft summary of submissions were considered and Members requested some amendments. It was noted that stakeholder workshops are being planned in Australia and New Zealand for the end of September/early October 2017.

Members noted that Matthews Pegg Consulting Pty Ltd (mpconsulting) has been engaged to conduct the five year review of the HSR system and also discussed the timeframes for reporting to Ministers and the inclusion of stakeholder consultation on the draft Five Year Review Report.

Members also noted an update from the Social Marketing Advisory Group (SMAG) Chair on the HSR campaign. The SMAG Chair advised that future activities for Phase 5 of the campaign are currently being considered and that, as awareness of the HSR system is now at 75% of those surveyed (n=1052 main/joint grocery buyers aged 18 years and older), the focus of the campaign will shift from awareness to understanding how to use the system correctly within a balanced diet. Members also noted that engagement through social media would continue.

Members noted an update on the HSR Technical Advisory Group (TAG) activities from the TAG Chair and TAG member Dr Greg Gambrill. There has been a good response from manufacturers to the TAG Chair’s request for product data for TAG modelling purposes for the five year review and there are now around 5,500 foods in the product database.

The TAG principles were endorsed and Members agreed that they be uploaded to the HSR website.

Dr Gambrill updated Members on the work that has been undertaken to date in relation to the anomaly about dairy and dairy-based products. A good spread of dairy and dairy-based product data has been received from the dairy industry and Dr Gambrill outlined the results of the modelling undertaken on this issue and TAG’s deliberations. Members agreed that consultation on this issue with dairy manufacturers is required and agreed that a forum be held with the dairy industry to explain the issue and proposed solution.

A product clarification enquiry, that had been raised previously in relation to flours derived from vegetables and legumes, was discussed and Members considered additional information about this issue, including information received from Food Standards Australia New Zealand in relation to isolates. After considerable discussion, Members agreed that by virtue of being derived from vegetables and legumes, vegetable and legume flours should receive V points under the HSR system.

9 May 2017

Members noted that at the 28 April 2017 Australia and New Zealand Ministerial Forum on Food Regulation (the Forum) meeting, Ministers considered suggestions from stakeholders to improve the system including ‘as prepared’ rules and asked the HSRAC to address these concerns as a matter of priority.

Members endorsed the discussion paper on the ‘as prepared’ rules with minor amendments. The public consultation on the ‘as prepared’ rules opened on 19 May 2017 and closes at midnight 30 June 2017.

Members considered the HSR timeline for the five year review. Members noted that the timeframes were tight in terms of completing a review report for the Forum to consider in mid-2019 and these timeframes will need to be closely monitored as work progresses on the review.

The discussion paper for the public submission process for the five year review of the HSR system was endorsed by Members with minor amendments. Members agreed to launch the discussion paper on the Department of Health’s online consultation hub three weeks after the ‘as prepared’ discussion paper. The public consultation on the five year review opened on 8 June 2017 and closes at midnight on 20 July 2017.

Research Company Pollinate conducted the Phase 4 campaign evaluation survey from 6-14 April 2017, to gauge consumer awareness, understanding and sentiment towards the HSR system in comparison with previous phases of the campaign. A nationally representative sample of n = 1052 main and joint grocery buyers aged 18-84 participated in an online survey. Members were advised that:

  • Three quarters (75%) of Australian grocery shoppers are aware of the HSR (prompted awareness). This is an increase of 16% since the last campaign evaluation nearly one year ago (June 2016).
  • Usage of the HSR system varied: 58% bought a product with the HSR displayed; 39% compared the HSR to other nutritional information; and 25% avoided a product due to its HSR.
  • Of those who bought a product with an HSR half just noticed the HSR and 35% claimed a higher HSR influenced their choice of product.
  • Of those who bought the product with a higher HSR, the majority (82%) continued to buy the product that had a higher HSR.
  • Shoppers were positive regarding the ease and relevance of the HSR: 73% believed the HSR should be used to compare similar products and 68% think the HSR makes it easier to compare products in the same section of the supermarket and identifies the healthier option.

14 February 2017

The Australian and New Zealand updates provided to Members regarding the implementation of the Health Star Rating (HSR) system were positive. The Two year progress review report on the implementation of the HSR system - June 2014 – June 2016 will be provided to the Australia and New Zealand Ministerial Forum on Food Regulation (Forum) on 28 April 2017. The report will be published on the HSR website once endorsed by the Forum. The report includes the National Heart Foundation of Australia’s Report on the monitoring of the implementation of the HSR system in the first two years of implementation: June 2014 - June 2016 and the New Zealand Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) report entitled Health Star Rating – Monitoring the implementation at year 2.

The HSRAC noted that the Front-of-Pack Labelling (FoPL) Secretariat had received a submission regarding a potential anomaly with the HSR Calculator. The submission outlines and provides supporting evidence that some products which are categorised as a Dairy Food (Category 2D) receive a lower HSR than nutritionally similar dairy-based products which fall into Category 2 – Food. Members agreed that this is an anomaly as per the agreed anomaly definition, however, additional product data is required to review Category 2D and the foods it covers. Members agreed to refer the anomaly to the HSR Technical Advisory Group (TAG) as a priority issue for it to consider. Members agreed that relevant stakeholders should be consulted on this issue.

Members noted an update on the TAG activities and that, since the last HSRAC meeting, the TAG has met twice. To date TAG has prioritised the table of issues that HSRAC has asked them to consider and investigated data sources to review the HSR Calculator. Members agreed to include the names of the TAG members as well as their expertise on the HSR website. The TAG table of issues has been prioritised to provide some guidance to the TAG on the order in which the activities/modelling should be completed. The HSRAC agreed to the revised and prioritised table of issues.

Members discussed the form of the food (‘as prepared’) issue and noted that there is an issue with the ‘as prepared’ rules in the HSR guidance documents and agreed that it will be considered a priority issue for the five year review. A number of possible options were discussed including an option to only allow the use of the ‘as prepared’ rule when rehydrating a product with water. Members acknowledged that there may be many products affected and that consultation with stakeholders will be required before any changes are made to the guidance material.

Members considered a draft discussion paper for the public submission process for the five year review of the HSR system. It is proposed that the public submission process be conducted in the first half of 2017 and respondents will be allowed six weeks to provide submissions. It is envisaged that the FoPL Secretariat will collate the submissions and prepare a summary table of the issues raised in the submissions that will be published on the HSR website. Members agreed that the discussion paper requires some amendments and that it be circulated to Members out-of-session for endorsement.

Members endorsed a revised Statement of Requirement to engage a reviewer to complete the five year review of the HSR system.

Members considered a HSR timeline for the five year review activities and agreed to publish the timeline on the HSR website.

Members noted the update on the HSR system campaign and that Phase 4 of the campaign was launched on Sunday 5 February 2017.

18 November 2016

The Australian and New Zealand updates provided to Members regarding the implementation of the HSR system were positive. The voluntary system has surpassed all expectations as the half-way point of the five year implementation period for the system approaches. As at the end of September 2016, there were over 5,500 products displaying the HSR label on supermarket shelves in Australia and over 2,500 products in New Zealand.

The National Heart Foundation of Australia presented the preliminary findings and themes identified through their analysis of data collected as part of monitoring the first two years of implementation of the HSR system. At the end of year 2 (June 2016), the system was displayed across more than twice as many food categories as Year 1 (n=74 vs. n=36), and implemented by nearly three times the number of manufacturers (n=63 vs. n=23). The majority of the products displaying the HSR system graphic were consistent with the HSR guidance documents.

Members considered an early draft of the Two year progress review report on the implementation of the Health Star Rating system, June 2014 - June 2016. Members also considered a draft Statement of Requirement to engage a reviewer to undertake the five year review of the system.

The HSR Technical Advisory Group (TAG) has now been established and an initial teleconference of the group was held to introduce members and the work ahead. HSR Advisory Committee Members considered the table of issues for referral to the TAG for analysis, noting the issues were derived from stakeholder engagement to date. This is a working document and there will be further opportunity for stakeholders to raise additional issues within the timeframe of the five year review.

Members considered a process of consultation for the five year review and agreed that a formal public submission process be undertaken with the timing to be determined.

Members discussed the following product clarification enquiries:
  • Frozen juice products - When juice is frozen and categorised as a food (Category 2) these products most often receive a lower rating than the unfrozen juice beverage (Category 1) equivalent (although the nutritional content of the product does not change). Members agreed that manufacturer’s may choose which category (Category 1 or Category 2) to apply to their products provided there is no change in the nutritional profile of the product.
  • Chickpeas - Raw and cooked versions of chickpeas are being treated as 100% FVNL by manufacturers despite the difference in water content and nutritional value. Members agreed that the star rating should reflect the claimed content in the ingredient list or from the ingoing weight of the chickpea ingredient. For example if the product has 20% chickpeas then the FVNL should be calculated on 20% chickpeas.
  • Flours derived from vegetables and legumes - Enquiries have been received regarding vegetable and legume flours and their eligibility to score FVNL points when presented as a single ingredient and/or when added as an ingredient. Members agreed to seek technical advice on the intent of Schedule 22 of the Food Standards Code in relation to isolates.

9 August 2016

The Australian and New Zealand updates provided to Members regarding the implementation of the HSR system were positive. As at the end of May 2016 there were over 4,000 products displaying the HSR label on supermarket shelves in Australia and over 1,500 products in New Zealand.

Members noted the difficulties in providing timely information regarding the HSR system to stakeholders and considered more regular reporting processes in order to provide updates to stakeholders via the HSR website.

Members discussed the HSR social marketing campaign noting the positive results of the evaluation of Phase 3 and considering future activities for Phase 4, particularly additional public relations activities that could be undertaken.

Members discussed the outcomes from the recent HSR stakeholder workshops that have been held in Melbourne, Perth, Brisbane and Sydney. The workshops were generally well received and similar key issues were raised and discussed. The main themes from the workshops were:

  • Increase education campaign activities;
  • Consider making the system mandatory;
  • Ensure review processes are transparent;
  • Reconsider alignment of the HSR system with the Australian Dietary Guidelines; and
  • Consider amendments to the algorithm.

Members discussed the process and timing for addressing the issues raised, noting that evidence will need to be collected on issues relating to the algorithm and agreed that a newly formed Technical Advisory Group would be established to undertake this work.

Members endorsed the draft terms of reference for the Technical Advisory Group to review the HSR Calculator and agreed the proposed membership of the group.

8 April 2016

The HSR Advisory Committee commenced planning for the formal five year review of the HSR system and agreed that, if possible, the report will be provided to the Australia and New Zealand Ministerial Forum on Food Regulation (Forum) in June 2019. Members also considered the proposed structure and scope of the review. Members agreed that, in order to achieve a degree of independence, consultant (s) should be engaged to complete/compile the review. Members also agreed that a technical working group be established to review the HSR Calculator.

The HSR Advisory Committee noted three anomaly submissions and the actions taken in response to these.

Members agreed a nomination for a retail representative on the HSR Advisory Committee be referred to the Forum, via the Food Regulation Standing Committee.

The HSR Advisory Committee decided that cacao/cocoa beans will not be able to score V points under the HSR system as they do not provide sufficient nutritive value and are seeds used for beverages and sweets (as defined in Schedule 22 of the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code).

16 February 2016

The HSRAC noted implementation of the HSR system is progressing well with over 2700 products on shelf displaying the HSR graphic in Australia; and approximately 1000 products on shelf displaying the HSR system in New Zealand.

The HSRAC noted the positive results of the evaluation of the second phase of the social marketing campaign in Australia and discussed the development of phase three. The evaluation report on phase one and phase two is available on the HSR website.

The HSRAC considered the draft Interim Report on the Monitoring of the HSR system (Year 1) from the National Heart Foundation of Australia and agreed that the results are very positive and that the Interim Report be provided to the FRSC and the Forum. This report covers the first year of implementation (June 2014 - June 2015).

30 October 2015

The HSR Advisory Committee noted implementation of the HSR system is progressing well with over 1500 products on shelf displaying the HSR graphic in Australia; and approximately 400 products on shelf displaying the HSR system in New Zealand.

The Committee noted the positive results of the evaluation of the first phase of the social marketing campaign in Australia. The evaluation report is available on the HSR website.

The Committee agreed that the HSR Style Guide be amended to include a new section on the provision of an information panel on the side or back panel, and clarify that the HSR graphic displayed on the information panel should match the HSR graphic on the front-of-pack. Members also agreed that the information panel could include a Quick Reference Code that links directly to the HSR website.

Image of quick reference code

The Committee agreed that in respect to displaying the HSR on multipack or variety pack products:

  • if more than one Nutrition Information Panel is included on the pack, if possible, companies should display more than one HSR to represent each product in the pack;
  • if companies choose to display only one HSR, then an average HSR which represents the average nutrient content of all of the products within the outer pack should be displayed; and
  • alternatively, if only one HSR is to be used, companies could display the lowest HSR and indicate that the products within are equivalent to the displayed rating or higher.

The Committee began discussions on the scope of the progress review on implementation of the HSR system at two years (June 2016) due to the Australia and New Zealand Ministerial Forum on Food Regulation.

17 July 2015

  • The Committee noted that there are now over 1000 products on shelf displaying the HSR graphic.
  • Monitoring and evaluation of the HSR system is currently being finalised, and there will be reporting on the implementation of the HSR system in both Australia and New Zealand.
  • The monitoring and evaluation of the HSR system has been extended to include:
    • auditing of the HSR Calculator - to determine, for products with the HSR graphic, whether the star rating displayed on pack matches the value calculated by the HSR Calculator;
    • more regular uptake monitoring - data will now be collected and reported on a quarterly basis;
    • a number of additional survey waves to monitor consumer understanding and awareness of the HSR system.
  • The Guide for Industry to the HSR Calculator has been updated to reflect a decision taken by the Australia and New Zealand Ministerial Forum on Food Regulation that under the HSR system, nut and seed based beverages can be classified as 1D - Dairy Beverages provided they meet the relevant calcium requirements.
  • The HSR website will be updated to include information related to governance and implementation of the HSR system; and to make the menu items easier to navigate.
  • The HSR Advisory Committee agreed to undertake an annual literature review of research related to the HSR system.

27 April 2015

  • Members met with the National Heart Foundation who was identified as the preferred supplier for the purposes of the monitoring and evaluation of the HSR system.
  • Members agreed on a minor amendment to the HSR Style Guide to clarify that the standalone energy icon could be used, for example, on small pack sizes and some confectionery and beverage products. The revised HSR Style Guide will be made available on the HSR website.
  • Members also agreed that apart from necessary minor changes for editorial or clarification purposes, no further changes to the HSR Style Guide would be made.
  • Members noted that the HSR website has been updated to include a news page which will provide a quick reference point for people looking for new information about the HSR system. The page currently features information regarding the details of upcoming stakeholder workshops and links to two new factsheets on the HSR system. The news page will also notify of amendments to the HSR Style Guide and Guide for Industry to the HSR Calculator.

17 February 2015

  • Four submissions regarding potential anomalies with the HSR Calculator were considered, as well as other correspondence regarding the HSR system.
  • Members agreed to post a register of anomaly submissions that have been considered by the HSR Advisory Committee.
  • Members noted that a proposal to amend Standard 1.2.7 – Nutrition, Health and Related Claims31 (the Standard) of the Australia and New Zealand Food Standards Code was being developed to remove the requirement for food manufacturers to comply with specific requirements in the Standard that would be imposed if they chose to display the prescribed nutrient icons within the HSR graphic.
  • Members agreed on a Dispute Resolution Process, should complaints be received about the HSR system. The process will be made available on the HSR website.
  • Members noted that the HSR website would be further developed to include, for example, a ‘What’s New’ page that may feature information such as details of upcoming stakeholder workshops, and notification of amendments to the HSR Style Guide and Guide for Industry to the HSR Calculator.
  • Members noted that the request for tender to develop the monitoring and evaluation framework for the HSR system has been released, and will close on 11 March 2015.

31 October 2014

  • Significant progress was made in scoping the monitoring and evaluation framework. It was agreed that relevant expert/s would be commissioned to assist with finalising the framework and sourcing appropriate data.
  • Two submissions regarding potential anomalies with the HSR Calculator were considered, as well as other correspondence regarding the HSR system.
  • Members agreed on the approach for a dispute resolution process, should complaints be received about the HSR system.
  • A representative from The George Institute for Global Health attended part of the meeting to discuss the role it could potentially play in enhancing adoption of the HSR system.
  • Members noted that the three recent workshops held with food companies and other stakeholders in Sydney (26 August 2014), Melbourne (19 September 2014) and Perth (17 October 2014) were well attended, including representation from small to medium enterprises. Participants were provided with information about development of the HSR system, how the HSR Calculator operates and an overview of the intended social marketing approach, with the opportunity to ask questions throughout. A summary of questions and answers from all three workshops is currently being prepared.
Top of page

26 August 2014

  • Members noted an update from the Chair of the Social Marketing Advisory Group on the development of the social marketing campaign for the HSR system, and considered the content of a digital approach for a ‘soft launch’.
  • Members agreed on a Monitoring and Evaluation Framework for the HSR system, and will continue its development at the next meeting.
  • Members noted that additional stakeholder workshops are scheduled for 26 August 2014 in Sydney; 19 September 2014 in Melbourne; and mid-October 2014 in Perth (date later confirmed as 17 October 2014). The stakeholder workshops are intended to provide guidance on how to apply the HSR system; an overview of the social marketing campaign; an update on other work that is underway; and to gain feedback from stakeholders regarding current understanding of the system and what support is required going forward.
  • Members assessed the first anomaly submissions against the process endorsed by the Australia and New Zealand Ministerial Forum on Food Regulation at its meeting on 27 June 2014. The outcomes of the HSR Advisory Committee’s consideration of anomaly submissions will be available on the HSR website once it goes live.
Top of page

15 July 2014

  • New Zealand was welcomed as a Member of the HSR Advisory Committee.
  • Members noted an update from the Chair of the Social Marketing Advisory Group on the development of the social marketing campaign for the HSR system.
  • Members agreed to convene additional stakeholder workshops to: provide guidance on how to apply the HSR system; provide an overview of the social marketing campaign; provide an update on other work that is underway; and to gain feedback from stakeholders regarding current understanding of the system and what support is required going forward. There is one stakeholder workshop scheduled for 26 August 2014 in Sydney and one on 19 September 2014 in Melbourne.
  • Members discussed the development of a Monitoring and Evaluation Framework for the HSR system.
  • Members noted that the process for dealing with HSR Calculator anomalies was endorsed by the Australia and New Zealand Ministerial Forum on Food Regulation at its meeting on 27 June 2014, and agreed that the process be made available on the Australian Health Ministers Advisory Council website - www.ahmac.gov.au (subsequently made available on the HSR system website).
  • Members are working to establish a complaints process with the intention that it is in place as products appear on shelf.
  • Members noted the update from the HSR Advisory Committee Chair in relation to recent meetings with small and medium enterprise in Western Australia, Victoria and South Australia. The Chair advised that the meetings were well attended, and constructive discussions took place.
Top of page

15 April 2014

Overview

Members discussed the development of Interim Governance Arrangements for implementation of the HSR system, a proposed process to address any anomalies that may be identified within the HSR Calculator and minor refinements to the HSR Style Guide.

Key outcomes

  • Members discussed the proposed Interim Governance Arrangements for implementation of the HSR system and discussed options for seeking technical expertise in relation to complaints.
  • Some minor amendments to the HSR Style Guide were discussed for clarity and simplicity.
  • Members discussed the process to be considered by the Front of Pack Labelling (FoPL) Steering Committee for dealing with potential HSR Calculator anomalies.
  • Members noted the update from the HSR Advisory Committee Chair in relation to the recent Adopters and Supporters meetings in Melbourne and Sydney. The Chair advised that the meetings were well attended, effective and that constructive discussions took place.
  • Members considered preliminary work undertaken by the former FoPL Implementation Working Group in relation to monitoring and evaluation of the implementation of the HSR system, including options for the collection of baseline data. A representative from GoScan presented to Members. Members agreed to further consider monitoring and evaluation activities as a priority at its next meeting.
Top of page

3 March 2014

Overview

Members had a constructive discussion and made significant progress including consideration of the HSR label design, and developing a process to address any anomalies that may be identified within the HSR Calculator for consideration by the Legislative and Governance Forum on Food Regulation (the Forum) at its June 2014 meeting.

Key outcomes

  • Members noted that the work of the HSR Advisory Committee was to oversee and advise on the finalisation, implementation and evaluation of the HSR system, and to develop a process for dealing with anomalies for consideration by the Forum.
  • Members agreed to propose to the Front-of-Pack Labelling (FoPL) Steering Committee a name change from the FoPL Oversight and Advisory Committee, to the HSR Advisory Committee.
  • Members agreed to a number of proposed minor amendments to the Terms of Reference.
  • Members noted that the preferred implementation option for the HSR system is via an industry led code of practice hosted by the Australian Food and Grocery Council (AFGC) but was exploring alternate arrangements should the AFGC be unable to assume responsibility for administration of the code in the near future.
  • Members were provided with the HSR Style Guide containing draft artwork, noting that the artwork may be further refined in light of additional consultations.
  • Members agreed to establish the Social Marketing Advisory Group (SMAG), comprised of representatives with social marketing expertise, to inform the approach to social marketing activities. Initial SMAG membership was agreed to from the Heart Foundation, NSW Health, a public health expert, and the
  • Australian Government Department of Health. The AFGC, Australian Industry Group (AIG) and the Australian National Retailers Association also agreed to each put forward a nomination.
  • Members considered a process that could be used to address any anomalies that may be identified within the HSR Calculator. The FoPL Secretariat was asked to further develop the concepts discussed, for consideration at the next meeting of the HSR Advisory Committee.
  • Members considered preliminary work undertaken by the former FoPL Implementation Working Group in relation to monitoring and evaluation of the implementation of the HSR system, including options for the collection of baseline data. It was proposed that a GoScan representative be invited to the next meeting of the HSR Advisory Committee, pending initial discussions.
  • Members noted the importance of operating in good faith. Minutes are to provide an overview of the general discussion, and agreed outcomes. A short communique will be posted on the FoPL webpage (hosted by the Department of Health) after each meeting. Members agreed not to disclose further detail about committee deliberations to other stakeholders or media.
Top of page