AUSTRALIA'S country-of-origin labelling laws are deficient and should be reformed, the pork industry says.
Australian Pork Limited policy general manager Kathleen Plowman said few consumers of pork products knew what the terms "Product of Australia" or "Made in Australia" meant.
"The labelling issue is incredibly confusing," she said.
"The only way forward is to promote produce as Australian-grown, with appropriate labelling."
Speaking at a Senate inquiry into meat marketing last week, Ms Plowman said food labelled "Product of Australia" required all "significant ingredients" to be produced in Australia, but locally produced hams in brine were not eligible because brine had to be imported.
"Made in Australia" labelling, which required only 50 per cent of a product's value to be produced locally, was confusing and open to abuse, she said.
In 2007, a Brisbane processor had produced a popular "spiral" ham labelled "Made in Australia" by using imported Canadian ham wrapped around local bones.
Also at the inquiry, RSPCA officials said consumers wanted "welfare" labelling such as "free range" on livestock products, but improvements were needed.
They said existing terms were open to interpretation and there was no way of ensuring production processes adhered to minimum standards.
RSPCA chief executive Heather Neil said the UK had "Freedom Food" standards, which prescribed minimum standards for poultry, pork and dairy products.
"We want a similar base-line here so everyone is talking the same language," she said.
She called for well-developed labels to be included in all food laws.
Ms Neil said the RSPCA had developed a branding logo for use for eggs and pork, and was looking next at chicken meat.
The problem with the "free range" category at the moment was that it referred only to the need for outdoor access for at least eight hours a day.
There was no indication of whether animals actually went outside, or if they did, whether there was adequate shade, she said.
