HomeRegulation and Policy
Regulation and Policy
Digital Food Labels: A Trojan Horse for Removing Your Right to Know
MPI’s “digital labelling trial” sounds harmless — but it may be the first step toward removing vital information from food labels and hiding it behind QR codes. From allergen risks to enforcement gaps, here’s why New Zealand shoppers should be paying close attention before this becomes permanent.
Digital Labels and the Illusion of Transparency: What Happens When the Truth Lives Online?
Digital food labels are being sold as “modernisation,” but do they actually improve transparency? A new U.S. ruling warns that QR-only disclosure hides vital information. Here’s what New Zealand risks as labels move online — and what consumers still won’t see.
NZ Product Labelling Review: The Problems the Digital QR Trial Ignores
Before NZ rolled out its digital QR-code labelling trial, the Government’s own Product Labelling Review exposed far deeper issues — from weak enforcement to transparency gaps. Here’s what the Review actually said, and why the digital solution sidesteps the real problems.
Digital Labels Are Coming to New Zealand — But Will They Reveal Anything That Matters?
New Zealand is trialling digital food labels — but while QR codes sound modern, are they just relocating the same old blind spots?
Scan for the Truth: Why NZ Needs Real Food Transparency and QR‑Code Lab Results
Imagine standing in the supermarket, picking up a box of cereal, scanning the barcode… and seeing actual lab results instead of vague marketing claims.
Not just ingredients or allergens. Not just clean-sounding slogans. But real, batch-specific residue data — for...
Missing Science: The Evidence Gaps in New Zealand’s Glyphosate Assessment
New Zealand’s glyphosate assessment was built on a selective evidence base — and the 2017 Bruning–Browning review exposed just how much science never made it into the room. In this bonus investigation, we explore the missing studies, the unpublished data, the methodological shortcuts, and what these gaps mean for trust, transparency, and the future of chemical oversight in New Zealand.
History Repeating: Why the EPA’s 2025 Legal Battle Feels So Familiar
New Zealand’s EPA is back in court — and the arguments sound eerily familiar. In the final part of our mini-series, we look at why the agency’s 2025 defence mirrors the same assumptions, gaps, and borrowed conclusions challenged in 2017, and what this means for glyphosate regulation, public trust, and the future of chemical oversight in New Zealand.
The Coziness Problem: How Industry Influence Shaped New Zealand’s Glyphosate Decisions
New Zealand’s glyphosate decisions didn’t falter because the science was unclear — but because the system leaned on industry-influenced agencies and untested assumptions. Here’s how that coziness shaped our regulatory outcomes.
The Glyphosate Review NZ’s EPA Ignored: What the 2017 Report Revealed
A 2017 review warned the NZ EPA had overlooked major glyphosate risks. Eight years later, those same issues are heading to court — and nothing has changed.
Glyphosate Hazardous by Law — But Roundup’s Ingredients Stay Hidden
Glyphosate is legally classified as a Hazardous Substance, yet most of Roundup’s ingredients remain secret. Europe now requires full disclosure — so why doesn’t New Zealand?


