You can help by writing for change.

We would appreciate your help in writing and talking to Ministers, your local member and the media to keep them aware of the extent of problems caused by poor food regulation. The current addresses of all health State Ministers and the Commonwealth Minister can be found on the web.

You can see past wins and campaigns listed here.


Submission on A1261 - Irradiation – Increase in maximum energy level (March 2024)

Public Consultation: Feasibility study on options to limit unhealthy food marketing to children - response from Food Intolerance Network (March 2024) PDF

Public Consultation on the Review of the Food Standards Australia New Zealand Act 1991 (FSANZ Act Review) Impact Analysis – response from Food Intolerance Network (March 2024) PDF

Codex Alimentarius submission on new and emerging issues: Clean labels and hidden additives: an emerging consumer issue (February 2024)

Submission on A1254 - Rosemary extract as a food additive - extension of use (December 2023)

Submission to the Senate Standing Committee on Barriers to consistent, timely and best practice assessment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and support services for people with ADHD (July 2023)

Submission to Senate Standing Committee on Disruption in Australian Schools (February 2023) - thanks members for their help.

Codex Alimentarius submission on new and emerging issues: Propionates E280-283 an emerging issue (November 2022)

Submission to Review of food regulation Food Regulatory System – Strategic Planning for 2023 – 2026 from Food Intolerance Network (August 2022) - thanks to members for help.

Submission to the Australian Senate Select Committee on Autism (May 2021)

Submission to Review of food regulation: Aspirations for the food regulatory system from Food Intolerance Network members (January 2021) PDF version - thanks Teresa, Jennie and Bob.

Submission to Review of the Food Standards Australia New Zealand Act 1991 from Food Intolerance Network (November 2020) FIN PDF version and submissions to the same review from Additive Free Kids, Friends of the Earth, and Gene Ethics

Submission on A1193 - Irradiation as a phytosanitary measure for all fresh fruit and vegetables (December 2020)

Submission on A1191 - Mono- and diglycerides of fatty acids (INS 471) as glazing agent for fruits and vegetables (September 2020)

Response from FSANZ after teleconference on various food intolerance issues in February 2018 (June 2018)

Submission on A1158 – Rosemary extract as a food additive (July 2018) - approved without response

Submission on A1137 – Polysorbate 20 as a Food Additive with evidence of harm in scientific literature (June 2018) - approved without response

Major submission on A1136 with 7,000 signature Petition with trenchant comments asking FSANZ to reject a new way of hiding MSG in food: why Protein Glutaminase should not be approved as a Processing Aid (September 2017) . See final outcome

  • Outcome from review of food labelling in Australia (January 2011)

In 2010 FIN members put a huge effort into two submissions and now we are looking at what we might have achieved. Our main focus was on ingredient labels and we basically asked for full disclosure: all ingredients listed, other information such as full country of origin labelling and penalties for labels with incorrect information. You can see a list of what we asked for, and what we got below:

We asked for: all additives to be listed in the ingredient label instead of the 5% labelling loophole, under which some additives don't have to be listed in certain conditions.

What we got: the panel said 'it may not be feasible' to fit that information on the packet. In other words, no, all additives are not listed (paragraph 4.22). Funny that the same multinational food companies can fit this information on the label in the EU and UK!

We asked for: full disclosure of every ingredient in a product.

What we got: the panel recommended that 'vegetable oil' should no longer be an acceptable label - instead the type of vegetable oil should be specified (e.g. palm oil, sunflower oil). So that's a smidge of good news. Pity we won't necessarily know whether it contains synthetic antioxidants if the level is below 5%.

We asked for: the same mandatory warning about certain artificial colours as is used in Europe ('may have an adverse effect on activity and attention in children')

What we got: a recommendation that the food industry and others develop a voluntary code so that consumers can quickly identify additives that are of agreed medical priority for sensitive consumers. Not much chance of an improvement there! (Recommendation 11)

We asked for: Labelling of high glutamate ingredients (e.g. hydrolysed vegetable protein) that can have the same effects as MSG.

What we got: Nothing about glutamate labelling. MSG (flavour enhancer 621) is not even called an additive - now it is 'an entity' (paragraph 4.23). See 129 ways that MSG can legally be hidden in your food

We asked for: better monitoring of dodgy food labels and consequences for manufacturers who break the rules. Our submission was quoted in paragraph 8.6 "you 'can walk into any supermarket and find dozens of breaches of the label regulations'".

What we got: a recommendation for a new and effectively funded body to monitor food labelling and complaints. Great! Here's hoping it happens, and it works.

See the full review at$File/Labelling%20Logic_2011.pdf

See the full FIN submissions below.

  • Positive response from Amalgamated Holdings (Greater Union Cinema chain) about the ban on taking your own food into their cinemas (September 2005)  NOTE that Event Cinemas clarified in November 2011 that "no externally purchased hot food items are allowed to be brought into our cinemas (although some cinemas do permit them and the written conditions still say no food at all)" - thanks Caroline.

To see dozens of earlier letters to Ministers and food regulators see here. Includes Submission to National Health and Medical Research Council review of 1995 publication on Asthma (November 2003) and Submission to National Health and Medical Research Council review of 1996 publication on ADHD (November 2003)