Wineland Article August 2008: Health warnings on liquor products

putting you in touch
with the SA wine industry community

PREVIOUS WINELAND ARTICLES | WINELAND HOME

Making the BEST of a bad situation – health warnings on liquor products
With the deadline for compulsory health warnings on containers looming, the liquor industry at large is standing together and preparing to meet the legal requirements – despite these bringing about substantial new costs and difficult practicalities at a time when the industry is under siege on many fronts.

Top: Jean-Luc Sweerts, owner/winemaker: MC Square.
Above: A back label that protests, MC Square.

Although smaller businesses, at least in the wine and brandy industry, appear to be more vociferous in their frustration – being the ones likely to suffer most – the general feeling appears to be that the current status of the legislation is the lesser of the possible ‘evils’. It’s better to stand together and abide, rather than risking more draconic laws – like those originally proposed by the Department of Health.
Meanwhile, at the time of WineLand’s going to press, the liquor industry authorities were still awaiting a possible concession with regard to the 24 February deadline. This in the sense that the latest noises from the Department indicated a willingness to exempt those products already labelled by that time. This is obviously of huge significance to the wine industry, where bottle maturation is very much the name of the game, especially for the more upmarket products.
The director of Ara (Industry Association for Responsible Alcohol Use), Adrian Botha, sketched the background to the current status quo, and the liquor industry’s efforts to soften the blow during an interview with WineLand.
His comments, as well as those of other industry leaders interviewed, made it clear that the liquor industry had gone about this in a very diplomatic and cautious manner with a view to establishing an understanding with government rather than antagonising the powers that be with possible negative results. We are, after all, living in an era of increased focus on health and social responsibility matters, with a growing anti-alcohol lobby on a global scale.
This approach might have created the impression among some liquor producers that their representatives had taken this far-reaching and uncomfortable legislation ‘lying down’ after government had sprung this on them before ample opportunity to comment.
However, said Adrian Botha, “We’ve come a long way with discussions and consensus among all the role players, obviously also bringing in our legal experts. And, sure, this is going to be a costly exercise, but we’ve managed to ensure that we’ve now got label requirements that we can live with … and not something much worse.”
“If we go back to the start; there had been noises from the authorities about warning labels and in quite a few of the minister’s budget speeches to Parliament the issue about health warnings labels had come up.

“Sure, this is going to be a costly exercise, but we’ve managed to ensure that we’ve now got label requirements that we can live with … and not something much worse.”

“Remember, there are a number of countries which already have such warnings – one of the earliest was the United States. And a lot of South African wine and spirit exports are destined for the US, where we are already complying with such legislation. The exporters involved are thus used to it.”
Botha explained that the government had in 2005 published recommendations for draft legislation on warning labels. The industry, through Ara, immediately responded and met with “quite a few people”. These included bureaucrats and ministerial officials to convey the liquor industry’s standpoint.
“The original proposals were really tough. Of the most worrying was the clause requiring that we had to rotate and change the messages on a monthly basis and include the country’s nine official languages.”
Ara then had the impression that sufficient representations had been made and the whole health warning labels threat had been headed off – that the government had been convinced that such labels were not the most effective way of dealing with alcohol and health issues. There were counter proposals from the industry, among others, to rather have warning signs at liquor outlets on such issues as “no alcohol to people under the legal age”.
The industry was comfortable that it had taken the right stance and the right actions. “And then, bang, out of the blue, the warning label regulations were published in the Government Gazette in July last year. We were all taken by surprise. But the government had clearly taken heed of our serious objections to rotation and all the official languages. These had fallen away.
“We met immediately and agreed as an industry that there was clearly no way they would drop it. It was amended but they would go ahead.”
The agreed strategy was to seek legal advice, for instance on how to interpret the regulations – to be implemented in 18 months – and to agree on guidelines and act together. There were many meetings of the relevant role players, including the Wine and Spirit Board, Salba (SA Liquor Brand Owners Association), KWV, Distell, Brandhouse, VinPro, Wine Cellars South Africa (WCSA) , etc.
Following this, even mock-ups were made up to support general guidelines which were sent out to all concerned.
It was also agreed that Adrian Botha and the CEO of Salba, Riaan Kruger, would “play a role in providing guidance to ensure that there was some consistency … but no policing”.
“Sure, this is not pleasant and will cost money, but we’ve succeeded in making it more bearable as it was clear that government would not budge further.
“The wine guys later came back and said they had a problem with products already packaged. We managed to set a meeting with the Department of Health and they seemed accommodating. But we’re awaiting their confirmation of a changed deadline in this regard – in other words all liquor labelled (not”sold”) after this date would have to comply,” Botha said.
The chairperson of Wine Cellars South Africa – whose members effectively represent 85% of wine production in South Africa – Henk Bruwer, largely echoed Ara’s sentiments in the sense that “the original proposals by government were horrible, particularly on the aspect of language usage and size”.
He agreed that the current requirements are much more tolerable, but there is a “huge cost implication”. “Many labels are currently generic; producers use the same back label for different products, but with the health warnings this will have to change.
WCSA’s stand is that it is an uncomfortable and costly exercise, but everybody is in the same boat and in this way we could ensure that the requirements are not as bad as originally intended.
Meanwhile, a highly disgruntled small producer who approached WineLand is Jean-Luc Sweerts, winemaking consultant and owner of the MC Square brand.
He said he was “gatvol with those bureaucrats who have nothing to do with the position of South Africa in the world”.
“With their zero marketing experience about an industry they know nothing about, they want to dictate to us how to get our product in the very sophisticated and elegant markets of the hyper-civilised nations. These nations have elevated ordinary products to the most sought-after collector’s items.
“Cognac is not Witblits, Champagne is not sparkling wine, Cartier is not a horlosietjiemaker.
“Wine culture is elegance, creativity, achievement and art. Millions of rands, dollars and euro’s are invested in research, design, advertising and copy-writing. “Those sitting in armchairs in conference rooms have decided that the dronkies must be protected from the ill-effects of our industry. But if they can read, they won’t understand it; they will never buy the product since it’s too expensive and way above their standards.
“These warning messages are only pulling the industry’s image down to their low level. Let them put warnings on wine in aluminium foil/bag or bottles of wine that sells around R10/litre.
“Do we want to operate like the rest of Africa or do we want to be part of the leading nations of the world? Our exports are our pride and provide employment and foreign exchange,” said Sweerts.
He has demonstrated his dissatisfaction with the situation by labelling a Méthode Cap Classique with messages that ridicule the new legislation.
Ara’s interpretation relating to health messages on container labels of alcoholic beverages, originally circulated in January 2008, and updated in June 2008 is as follows:
On 24 August 2007, the Department of Health published Regulations relating to health messages on container labels. As the Regulations are rather broad and somewhat difficult to interpret in respect of what is actually required, ARA was requested to produce guidelines for its members to ensure a common level of understanding and compliance.
Ara was also requested to obtain legal opinion on the guidelines and this was duly obtained. In addition Ara has aligned the guidelines with international best practice (with particular reference to the United States – the largest alcohol beverage market – where messages on labels have been a requirement for many years).
A number of specific issues were deemed to require interpretation and the following guidelines and recommendations relate to these issues.
• The messages are to be incorporated on the label of the primary or “liquid holding” container and not the outer packaging or “carrier” container.
• The message should appear on the information label (usually a back or side label). A back label can be added to products that currently do not contain a back label or the message may appear on the primary (front) label.
• The message is to be clearly legible and must consist of black letters on a white background, with the white background being one-eighth of the label itself. Where the label has a white background it is recommended that a black border is placed around the message with the area within the black border being one eighth of the label size. The background of the warning label portion should be white, even if the label is a very light colour other than white.
• While the font used is at the discretion of the member, the letters should be in capitals and cursive type fonts are not acceptable.
• The placement of the message can be at the top, the bottom or the side of the label and may be vertical or horizontal. The message on cans should be included in the vertical information panel on the side of the can.
• On bottles that do not have labels, the message should be either embossed or screen printed on the bottle, or a separate sticker label should be used provided that the sticker meets all the specifications in terms of size, colour and font type.
• While the Regulations state that member companies are to use one of seven prescribed messages, at least three messages should be used by each member company, one per label across their product or package range.
• Warnings on miniatures:
– Add back label or utilise body label (anywhere including the side) – one eighth of the label.
– On bottles that do not have labels, the message should be either embossed or screen printed on the bottle, or a separate sticker label should be used provided that the sticker meets all the specifications in terms of size, colour and font type.
• Embossed labels:
– If only a neck label on embossed bottle: the warning should be one eighth of the neck label (it is the exception to the rule). This does not apply to ACL printing on bottle. ACL printing is considered a label and then the health warning should also be ACL’d or a label applied.
– Exception for neck label if there is no other label.
– It must be legible.
• With regard to timing, labels on all products sold into trade after 24 February 2009, should contain the required message. It is however recommended that member companies try and ensure that their major volume brands are compliant well in advance of the deadline and that they start implementing the requirements of the Regulations as soon as possible.
• Ara will provide advice to companies if required. Requests for guidance can be channelled through the Ara office and Adrian Botha and a small sub-committee will consider and respond to the request.
• The regulations obligate the use of any one of the following messages:
– Alcohol reduces driving ability, don’t drink and drive.
– Drinking during pregnancy can be harmful to your unborn baby.
– Alcohol abuse is dangerous to your health.
– Alcohol increases your risk to personal injuries.
– Alcohol is a major cause of violence and crime.
– Alcohol is addictive.
– Don’t drink and walk on the road, you may be killed.
For advice contact Ara at tel (011) 326-2906 or fax 088 (011) 326 2906.

Visit our sister sites:

Technical guide for wine producers

South African wine farmers' representative organisation

2009/10 Directory Now Available!
Facts, figures, contact details and much more...