The following is directly from the NSW Food Authority regular newsletter – foodwise – and is included here with permission.

The Food Regulation 2010 is scheduled for statutory repeal on 1 September 2015 – a formal process which occurs every five years that requires the NSW Government to determine whether the Regulation should lapse and, in doing so, allow self-regulation, or be remade as is, or be remade with amendments.

The proposed Food Regulation 2015 and the Regulatory Impact Statement (RIS) are available for public comment until Friday, 26 June 2015.

The current Regulation plays a vital role in ensuring food is safe for consumption and that consumers are adequately informed prior to making purchase decisions. The proposed amendments build on changes that have been made to the Regulation over the period 2010–14, and are targeted at improving the efficiency and removing unnecessary impost on business, government or the community, while remaining contemporary and fit for purpose.

The Food Authority recommends the Regulation be remade as Food Regulation 2015, with minor amendments.

To access the proposed Food Regulation 2015 and RIS, and/or for more information regarding the proposed amendments, as well as how to make a submission, visit www.foodauthority. nsw.gov.au/industry/legislation/ regulation-2010-review

So have your say before 26 June 2015.

Rachelle Williams, The Green Food Safety Coach.

It has finally been conclusively proven that the longer you are in a supermarket the more you are going to spend.

I guess it really isn’t a surprise, but the US study published in the Journal of Marketing, Volume 79, Issue 3 and authorised by Timothy Gilbride and other researchers from the University of Notre Dame in Indiana, has confirmed that you are more likely to give in to temptation for the impulse buy the longer you remain in the supermarket.

Researcher Timothy Gilbride said; “So there is a good reason why the celebrity gossip magazines and candy are located closer to the check-out aisles. It takes mental effort to keep to our goals, and over time, we get tired and are less conscientious, or just give up.’’

The researchers found there are two basic models; the self –regulation theory and the cueing theory. The self regulators will buy the unplanned choice early and it will remind them to stick to their shopping list. However, there is a fault in this plan, sometimes the shoppers suffer “resource depletion” and wander off the shopping list completely.

The Cuers, however make an unexpected purchase and it triggers them to buy something they would have forgotten to get.

The researchers found that you have a greater chance of controlling the shopping budget if there is a list, but even then some give themselves a treat for sticking to the list!!!!!!

This study will be invaluable to the supermarket chains and their marketers because if they can find reasons to keep people in their stores, there will be more money spent.

Rachelle Williams, The Green Food Safety Coach.

All food sold in this country must meet the requirements of the Food Standards Code, regardless of whether it was made here or overseas. Domestically compliance to the Code is monitored by state and local governments.

For food which is imported into the country, the responsibility for this monitoring is held by the Department of Agriculture (DOA) through the Imported Food Inspection Scheme (IFIS).

This scheme determines whether imported food meets all the safety, composition and labelling requirements.

There are two levels of risk for imported products, as determined in assessment done by Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) – Risk products and Surveillance products. Risk products require that inspections are done at each import, however as the importer builds up a history of compliance, those inspections are reduced but will increase again if a failure is identified. Surveillance products, on the other hand, have less and random inspections, which will increase only if there is a failure of compliance.

A further option exists, which allows importers to be responsible for some parts of the compliance assessment themselves, through the Food Import Compliance Agreement (FICA). It requires food safety systems and periodic audits by DOA officers. It has not been a popular option to date.

The recent berry and Hepatitis food poisoning created a lot of fear and discussion within the community. As a result there has been a lot of confusion about what is labelling and what is food safety? The recent release of the trial on new Country of Origin Labelling (CoOL) requirements is all about labelling. At the same time the Australian National Audits Office (ANAO) was asked to review the whole imported food assessment process to address potential food safety issues.

The report from this review has now been published and presented to Parliament, and it contains three recommendations:

1. A new approach for monitoring risk profiles and the referral of food for inspection;
2. Better management of inspection-related activities and non-compliances; and
3. The development of performance measures and reporting on outcomes.

The report also suggests several improvement areas;

• The establishment of mechanisms to assure products are being categorised as ‘risk’ or ‘surveillance’ correctly
• Better consistency between regional offices of the DOA. This has been highlighted by the ANAO as a problematic area as some methods used by the offices differ, leading to a risk of inconsistent implementation and decision-making
• Better consistency in the management of serious breaches – including better investigation practices and documentation
• Developing performance measures specific to the IFIS – including identification of emerging trends and changes and measuring the extent to which objectives are met.

The Report can be found at http://www.anao.gov.au/Publications/Audit-Reports/2014-2015/Administration-of-the-Imported-Food-Inspection-Scheme

Rachelle Williams, The Green Food Safety Coach.

As a result of the whole berries and possible hepatitis A event which happened recently, the Australian Government has just released it’s ideas for a logo to show whether the amount of ingredients in a food is more or less than 50 percent.

Although many people and the media seemed to be confused in believing that labelling for country of origin was a food safety issue, labelling is actually only about providing information.

The safety of the food coming into this country is set in the Food Standards Code, they are the same standards as those for food made in this country.

Australians are recognised as being parochial when it comes to knowing where our food comes from, and this demand, which intensified with the berry incident, is what has driven this move by the Government.

The Code currently has two origin labelling options; “Made in Australia” and “Product of Australia”, with the second option having the highest content of Australian material.

The new proposal is all based on the percentage of ingredients and whether a food has less than 50% or more than 50%. It is intended to make it easier for consumer to understand the Australian contect of a food, so they can make decisions as required.

The content will be represented by a logo and six were released for review,  and can be found on the website below
  
The public have been invited to have a say about which logo is prefers, by undertaking a survey.

The familiar “Australian made kangaroo”, which is already owned by the Government, seems to be the front runner to date. The survey is open until August 2015 as part of the review period.

Depending upon which of the logos will eventually be required, there will be the usual phase in period, depending upon the type of product, to allow manufacturers to run down old packaging stock before buying that with the logo. So we will probably see the new logo appearing in our supermarket next year.

Industry Minister Ian Macfarlane said “They’re not satisfied with something that just simply says ‘Made in Australia from local and imported produce,’ that means nothing to them.”

For more information go to –http://www.industry.gov.au/industry/IndustrySectors/FoodManufacturingIndustry/Pages/Country-of-Origin-Labelling.aspx

Rachelle Williams, The Green Food Safety Coach.

So we have either heard about, or experienced, the bad food on planes right?

I’d have to say that the food I have been given on my flights has been very presentable and tasty. Everyone around me has asked if they could have it. Funny that, as most people usually would not choose to have the vegetarian instead of their meaty choice.

A study by Cornell University has found there might be a good reason why we generally don’t like the food on airplanes, and it is not the food or the way it is made or presented or heated.

It is the noise of the plane.

Robin Dando, Assistant Professor of Food Science at Cornell University, said; “Our study confirmed that in an environment of loud noise, our sense of taste is compromised.”

It is important to note however that not all of the tastes are impacted aversely by the noise, umami (which is a combination of savoury and sweet) was found, by the 48 participants in the study, to taste better.

It was sweet that really is affected poorly by the noise on the plane, whilst, salty, bitter and sour tasted similar to being on the ground.

Assistant Professor Dando said; “The multisensory nature of what we consider ‘flavor’ is undoubtedly underpinned by complex central and peripheral interactions. Our results characterise a novel sensory interaction, with intriguing implications for the effect of the environment in which we consume food.”

This study could well result in significant changes to the menus on planes as airlines work to getting rid of the bad reputation their foods sometimes have.

Rachelle Williams, The Green Food Safety Coach.

To some genetic modification of our food is bad and to others it is simply a way to improve it.

A farmer in South Australia has been doing some modification of his pigs lately. He is not doing it in some lab but in his farm. So is genetic modification good or bad?

What has he done that is so amazing?

He now has longer pigs.

So why is that a big deal? Longer pigs means more ribs, and that means he is better able to meet an increasing demand for ribs in restaurants.

So how has he done it? By selectively breeding sows with more ribs. Apparently pigs can have 13 ribs or 17, so by only breeding the 17 rib pigs, Jeff Braun, from South Australia, has dramatically increased the value of his animals.

By making the pigs longer and hence bigger, he has also increased the size of each sow’s udder and the percentage of meat yield. So what,huh?

Well, that has allowed for a dramatic 30 percent increase in the udder capacity allowing for a dramatic increase in the size of each of the litters that are now being produced.

Mr Braun said; “A sow has double the butter fat and double the milk solids in its milk compared to a dairy cow and when we look at the 21-day litter weights we are now achieving, it has to produce more milk solids in a day than the best dairy cows in the world.”

The average weight of a litter after 21 days is 80kgs in Europe, Mr Braun is achieving 100 kg consistently, through his genetic program and by providing a perfect environment. Each of Mr Braun’s pigs are reaching weights of more than 100 kg each within 16 weeks, which is amongst the highest growth rates in the world. All by genetic engineering, and the perfect environment.

This has been a project in development for three decades and is focused not only on improving yield in meat, litters and, of course, ribs, but in creating an environment that allows the sows to have natural behaviours.

Mr Braun said; “The plan has all been undertaken to minimise stress and to understand the animals’ needs. It’s all straw-based systems where the sows will have the ability to conduct natural behaviours of eating straw, digging, rooting in the stall, within a couple of degrees of set temperature.”

There is a perception out there that farmers are more interested in making money that their animals welfare. The work done by this farmer shows that this is not the case at all.

As Jeff Braun says “Experience has certainly told us, as farmers, that the more we give to our animal and the more we understand our animal … the more it’s going to give back to us. It gives me great pleasure to be able to observe my stock and look at the contentment – and then see the productivity responses we get.”

Rachelle Williams, The Green Food Safety Coach.

So who doesn’t like chocolate?

Most people have will admit to being chocolate lovers, even if they are more savoury than sweet.

However would they pay US$260 for a single 50 g bar (more than $5 per gram)?

For nearly all of us the answer would be –“what!!!!!!”

The most expensive chocolate in the world is a limited edition of only 574 bars, and there are still 89 available for purchase.

So beside being a limited number, what makes this chocolate so special that people will pay that amount for it?

Chocolate is made from cocoa which is produced from Cacao beans. Recently the creators of To’ak Chocolate found a small pure grove of the rare heirloom species of Cacao trees, Nacional. The world’s most expensive chocolate has been made from beans from these trees.

In the 1800s this variety of cacao was considered by many chocolatiers to have the most prized and complex flavour profile. The outbreak of Witch’s Broom disease nearly drove the variety to extinction in 1917 and it disappeared for nearly 100 years.

Nacional cacao is native is Ecuador and the two To’ak cofounders found it there again, and have produced the world’s most expensive chocolate as a result.

The whole area is now being very carefully protected and much work is occurring to protect the variety and the genetic line, so it does not get lost again or go extinct.

For a product this expensive, there is special packaging, including tasting utensils to use to eat the chocolate so that hands do not contaminate it. The Spanish Elm wooden box includes the engraved bar number on the back and a 116 page booklet explaining the ritual to taste dark chocolate. In the centre of each bar is a single Nacional bean to remind the eater of the history and importance of what they eating.

To find out more – https://toakchocolate.com/

Rachelle Williams, The Green Food Safety Coach.

This coming weekend sees that start of this year’s Foodservice Trade show. The 2015 exhibition is being held in Melbourne and runs from31 May to 02 June.

A highlight of this year’s show is the Café School, which will help new and current café owners how to build great sandwiches, coffee and pizza making, improving menus and increasing profits.

An important focus for the 2015 show is going to be on gluten free foods and how our industry can provide such foods to those who have a gluten issue. With gluten free now being considered to be mainstream, this has to be an area which every business should consider and work into their operations.

There will be 180 industry suppliers and the usual seminars and workshops. It is the place to be for restaurants, cafes, caters and those in baking.

Exhibition Director Tim Collett said; “Plenty of people in the hospitality industry are so busy working in their business, they don’t have time to work on their business.”

The other highlight is the prize of $10000 on offer to the winners of the Chef of the Year competition. The 32 top best chefs will have only one hour to prepare something magical from the ingredients in a mystery box.

More details can be found at http://www.foodserviceaustralia.com.au/

Rachelle Williams, The Green Food Safety Coach.

The first ever AFR Australia’s Top 100 Restaurant list was unveiled this month. This list is unique because it is the only award which is decided by peer voting.

The full list of 500 venues compiled by the editors and reviewers of the Good Food Guide and industry leaders, from across Australia are voted on by each other to determine the Top 100.

This year’s top spot was taken by last year’s Restaurant of the Year at the SMH Good Food Guide, so continues a very busy year for the Sydney restaurant, Sepia.

Sepia’s Chef Martin Benn was named Australia’s Top Chef, Chef of the Year in the Gourmet Traveller Awards and the Hottest Chef in the Weekend Australian Magazine’s 50 Hot Restaurants in Australia guide.

Food writer, Jill Dupleix, said; “We’re really thrilled that the Top 100 are such a mixed bag, from high to low, big to small, city and regional. It’s also very pleasing that the chefs haven’t just gone for the new and the hip, but really recognised and respected those long-lasting, enduring restaurants that give every city its heart and soul – Café Di Stasio and the Flower Drum in Melbourne.”

SMH reviewer, Terry Durack, said “The chefs and restaurateurs have chosen the Top 100 restaurants because they are the very best at what they do; and because they really deliver in terms of great produce, flavour, skill, seasonality and creativity. And I love that Belle’s Hot Chicken made it into the list, so it’s not just about brilliantly sophisticated dining, but about small but serious places doing one thing well.”

Here is The Top 100 Restaurants for 2015

1. Sepia NSW

2. Attica VIC

3. Quay NSW

4. Brae, Birregurra VIC

5. Cutler & Co VIC

6. Vue de Monde VIC

7. Cumulus Inc. VIC

8. Sixpenny NSW

9. Mr Wong NSW

10. Tetsuya’s NSW

11. Flower Drum VIC

12. Rockpool NSW

13. Bentley Restaurant & Bar NSW

14. Ester NSW

15. MoVida VIC

16. Momofuku Seiōbo NSW

17. Garagistes (closed) TAS

18. The Town Mouse VIC

19. Café Paci NSW

20. Café Di Stasio VIC

21. 10 William St NSW

22. Saint Crispin VIC

23. Porteno NSW

24. Supernormal VIC

25. Est. NSW

26. The Bridge Room NSW

27. Estelle VIC

28. Lee Ho Fook VIC

29. Rockpool Bar & Grill NSW

30. Lake House, Daylesford VIC

31. Biota Dining, Bowral NSW

32. Billy Kwong NSW

33. Marque NSW

34. Franklin TAS

35. Fratelli Paradiso NSW

36. Esquire QLD

37. Golden Century NSW

38. Monopole NSW

39. Sean’s Panaroma NSW

40. France-Soir VIC

41. Chin Chin VIC

42. Rockpool Bar & Grill VIC

43. Coda VIC

44. Magill Estate Restaurant SA

45. Restaurant Amusé WA

46. Bar Lourinhã VIC

47. Orana SA

48. The Apollo NSW

49. Lau’s Family Kitchen VIC

50. Ezard VIC

51. Pilu at Freshwater NSW

52. Icebergs Dining Room & Bar NSW

53. Wasabi Restaurant & Bar QLD

54. Pei Modern VIC

55. Yoshii NSW

56. Moon Park NSW

57. Fish Face (closed) NSW

58. Guillaume NSW

59. LuMi NSW

60. Africola SA

61. Spice Temple NSW

62. Provenance, Beechworth VIC

63. Pendolino NSW

64. Cho Cho San NSW

65. Il Bacaro VIC

66. Hentley Farm, Seppeltsfield SA

67. Ormeggio at the Spit NSW

68. Nomad NSW

69. Tonka VIC

70. Grossi Florentino VIC

71. Urbane QLD

72. Oscillate Wildly NSW

73. Sokyo NSW

74. Gerard’s Bistro QLD

75. ARIA Restaurant NSW

76. Gingerboy VIC

77. Vasse Felix Restaurant, Cowaramup WA

78. Luxembourg VIC

79. Belle’s Hot Chicken VIC

80. The European VIC

81. Ms G’s NSW

82. Bodega NSW

83. MoVida NSW

84. Moon Under Water VIC

85. Ethos Eat Drink TAS

86. Izakaya Den VIC

87. Print Hall WA

88. ACME NSW

89. Spice Temple VIC

90. Longrain VIC

91. Epocha VIC

92. Peel St SA

93. El Publico WA

94. Ten Minutes By Tractor, Main Ridge VIC

95. Aubergine ACT

96. Longrain NSW

97. 4Fourteen NSW

98. Buon Ricordo NSW

99. Da Noi VIC

100. Lalla Rookh WA

Rachelle Williams, The Green Food Safety Coach.

So what is this ISO 22000 thing anyway and why is it a big deal that it is being reviewed?

Well ISO 22000 is one of the standards issued by the international Standards organisation. This specific one focusses on food safety and incorporates HACCP and much quality into a combined standard.

Although there is no legal requirement within this and other countries for businesses to implement this standard, many food businesses choose to as it provides structure and protection – particularly big and multinational businesses.

The standard has been in operation for 12 years and, as with all such documents, it needs to be reviewed at regular intervals to ensure that it still reflects reality and achieves what it is intended to do.

Therefore ISO 22000 is under it’s first review and it is expected that the new version will be published in 2017.

An ISO working group (ISO/TC 34/SC 17/WG 8) is driving the review and first met in February 2015. It will meet again later this year to discuss the second draft of the new version.

There has been a lot of feedback on the current version and this is being used by the working group to develop the new version.

Some of the potential changes will include;

• Clarify certain key concepts, especially critical control points required to be managed, operational programmes needed, approach to risks, product withdrawal and recall, and a combination of external control measures
• Update terms and definitions
• Make the standard simpler and more concise
• Avoid making the content too prescriptive
• Ensure a greater coverage of SMEs

Written by Rachelle Williams, The Green Food Safety Coach.