Labels on imports

Press, 20 December 1988, Page 12

Labels on imports

Some imported goods being sold in New Zealand do not carry labels to declare their country of origin. This upsets local manufacturers. The president of the Canterbury Manufacturers’ Association, Mr Bruce Fraser, complains that consumers are being misled, and are buying goods that are “shoddy and, at times, dangerous.” The last charge, if proved, is serious. Consumers in New Zealand are pretty well protected against dangerous goods, however, no matter where they have been made. The law as it stands can require that dangerous manufactures be withdrawn from sale, and that is as it should be.

Alert consumers protect themselves by buying recognised brands and supporting evidence of quality such as New Zealand Standards Association approvals, or Designmark or Woolmark labels. The other thrust of the manufacturers’ complaint is that consumers are being misled by unlabelled wares. This really has been answered by the manufacturers themselves. They have launched, in concert with the Council of Trade Unions, a “Buy New Zealand” campaign with appropriate labels to identify locally made products. Manufacturers who are proud of what they make will be quick to show their products’ origins; shoppers prepared to “Buy New Zealand” for preference or in patriotism — will look for

the labels before buying.

The difficulty with the manufacturers’ assertion that it should be compulsory for imported goods to carry country-of-origin labels is that this is the sort of petty protectionism New Zealand is trying to persuade other countries to drop. If shoppers are prepared to pay money for an article of unknown or doubtful provenance, on their own heads be it. It is reasonable to require that certain minimum standards of safety are complied with; blatant misrepresentation can be challenged under other provisions of the law; but it would be a nonsensical imposition to require that every brick, peppercorn, or metre of cloth be branded with the country of origin. The truth is that the problem is more apparent than real. Relatively few items on the shelves are not identified as to their place of manufacture; those that are probably suffer — in consumers’ eyes — because they are of doubtful pedigree. The manufacturers’ concerns betray a want of confidence. The campaign to persuade shoppers to “Buy New Zealand” presumably means that manufacturers are confident their customers would be buying quality, or at least value for money. That label should be enough. The call for country-of-origin labelling is akin to saying that goods made in New Zealand cannot foot it with goods made in mystery.