By Tony Goodger, head of marketing and communications, AIMS
At the time of writing 123,916 people have signed a petition “Say no to chlorinated chicken here in the UK”.
The accompanying text states that “animal welfare standards for animals like chickens are so poor that they have to be treated with chlorine before being sold” before adding that, “We can’t let it end up in supermarkets and restaurants across the UK”.
Meanwhile over in the EU their Agriculture and Fisheries Council met at the end of January. Among the items discussed was a paper from Germany, supported by Denmark, Latvia, Poland and Slovakia “Marketing standards for poultry meat”.
Referencing Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 (184 pages) and Regulation (EC) No 543 /2008 (48 pages) the Germans with their reputation for ruthless efficiency have distilled this all down into just 2 pages which make two asks.
First up is a request that marketing standards (deep breath now…) be “liberalised to the extent that they allow for indications that sufficiently account for the labelling approach now in use in multiple EU member states as well as the information needs of consumers: The ban on labelling outdoor husbandry types in another way hinders the evolution of outdoor husbandry systems, which many consumers are in favour of. Therefore, further flexibilisation (sic) and sufficiently comprehensible requirements allowing for correct implementation and control are needed for the labelling of meat from poultry kept in outdoor husbandry systems”.
Fortunately, it is the second ask that is of more interest to me and hopefully you the reader, namely that there is “an urgent need to revise the methods for determining the water content and the corresponding limits” to determine whether excess water has been taken up during processing.
The five member states argued that the provisions on maximum water content limits are based on “outdated scientific foundations” and that they “fail to take account of the changes in the marketplace brough about in particular by breeding”.
Asking that the current water limits be increased to take account of the “higher physiological water content” that faster-growing chicken breeds have.
The Commission rejected the request saying that “consumers should not pay for excess water and that increasing limits would result in a lower protein product.”
Now, I know you are all thinking what on earth is this fellow going on about. We, the UK, have long since dropped our EU membership and what they may wish to do is of no interest to us.
Well, I beg to differ. The UK and the EU are currently reviewing their Trade and Cooperation Agreement (the UK / EU Reset) a while the EU set limits on water content and distinguish between “extraneous water” absorbed during processing and “added water” used as an ingredient there is no single maximum limit for total water in chicken if it is clearly labelled.
Which is why many catering packs and frozen retail packs here have been produced to contain anywhere between 15% and 40% added water.
I had a quick look at a couple of mid-market supermarket frozen chicken breasts and specifically the customer’s reviews.
The first one had a mixed reaction with 44% providing five stars while 27% were one star with one commenting “No matter how you try to cook them you’ll always get the same result – half sized portions sitting in a puddle of salty water and white scum. They’re vile”.
Whilst the other, on paper, seemed to fair better with 64% giving five stars and 16% one. However, many of those awarding five stated that they cook the product for their pets only and don’t eat them themselves. Down in the one-star reviews there are no mention of four-legged consumers just disappointed diners complaining about the shrinkage and pools of water along with accusations of “belittling loyal customers” and that the store “should be ashamed”.
Compare this to French supermarket Carrefour and their clearly labelled frozen 20% brined chicken fillets with 80% five-star reviews and the other 20% four-star.
Not a word of dissatisfaction just comments such as “Very good value for money” and “Tender and generous in size”.
Maybe, when the UK and EU reset, it will be EU rules on water limits and exemplars in “honest” labelling that will prevail.