Here’s a shocking truth: the health star rating system on food labels, designed to guide consumers toward healthier choices, is falling flat—and by a significant margin. Despite ambitious targets, food manufacturers are nowhere near meeting their goals, leaving consumers in the dark about the nutritional value of what they’re eating. Let’s dive into why this matters and where it’s all going wrong.
The health star rating system, which assigns scores from half a star to five stars based on a product’s nutritional content, was meant to simplify healthy eating. But here’s where it gets controversial: the system is voluntary, and companies are dragging their feet. Originally, the goal was for 70% of eligible products to display these ratings by now—but the reality is far from it. As of November 2024, only about 33% of products are using the system, according to the Ministry of Primary Industries. That’s not just a miss—it’s a massive gap.
And this is the part most people miss: the targets were set after a 2019 review, aiming for 50% uptake by 2023, 60% by 2024, and 70% by November 2025. Clearly, we’re not on track. Vincent Arbuckle, deputy director-general of New Zealand Food Safety, notes that monitoring for 2025 will begin soon, but the data won’t be available until next year. Meanwhile, food ministers from New Zealand and Australia are expected to discuss in 2026 whether to make the system mandatory—a move that could shake things up.
Nutritionist and Māori health researcher Professor Lisa Te Morenga points out an interesting trend: healthier products with higher star ratings are more likely to display their scores. But for less healthy foods? Companies aren’t exactly rushing to advertise a half-star rating. Is this a failure of the system, or a reflection of corporate priorities? It’s a question worth debating.
Food Safety Minister Andrew Hoggard offers another perspective: businesses are hesitant to invest in a system that might change. “They want certainty,” he explains. Fair point—but does that justify the slow adoption? Hoggard confirms that a potential mandate will be discussed with Australian counterparts, but it’s a lengthy process. “We’re looking at costs, incentives, and whether it’ll actually encourage healthier choices,” he says. And let’s not forget his concern: “I don’t want to do anything that’ll raise food prices right now.”
Consumer NZ isn’t holding back, calling out manufacturers for being “woefully short” after years of opportunity. Te Morenga agrees: mandating the system is the way forward. “It’ll push manufacturers to improve their products, give consumers clear information, and create a fair playing field,” she argues. But here’s the kicker: Is mandating the system the answer, or are there better ways to encourage transparency and healthier choices?
What do you think? Should the health star rating system be mandatory, or is there another solution? Let’s spark a conversation—share your thoughts in the comments below!
