USING WORDS like ‘sausage’, ‘burger’ and 'steak' to describe foods that don’t contain meat should not be banned, a House of Lords investigatory committee has concluded.

The Lords' 'EU Energy and Environment Sub-Committee' had been asked to give its opinion on an EU proposal to clamp down on the use of meaty descriptors on vegetarian and vegan food packaging – and after hearing considerable evidence from all sides, has concluded that there is no harm in the practice.

In fact, the committee warned that any action to take these product names off the vegetarian menu would actually reduce consumer clarity and be a barrier to growth in a burgeoning sector of the food industry. It also suggested that efforts to reduce meat consumption benefitted from the the application of meaty terms to 'healthier' foods.

"The committee heard no evidence that consumers had felt they were misled by meat-free products and less than 4% of people had ever unintentionally bought a vegetarian product instead of a meat free version," it stated in its conclusion. "Further, witnesses were unanimous in the view that current naming conventions around vegetarian burgers and sausages in particular are clear and easy to understand.

"The committee therefore challenge the stated justification of the amendment to 'prohibit certain commercial practices that are misleading for consumers' and contest that without evidence of a problem, legislative action by the EU is unnecessary and would undermine EU policy objectives on climate change, the environment and public health."

The British Meat Producers Association had impressed the Lords with its argument that plant-based foods using the names set out in the amendment should “meet the same high standards as their equivalent meat-based products”, and that this was not currently always the case for highly-processed vegetarian products. However, the committee noted that issues of nutrition and quality were already addressed by existing legislation on the labelling of food; and if that legislation was not comprehensive in light of the growth of the vegetarian food industry, minor alterations to address specific issues might be more proportionate than the EU's proposed amendment to labelling rules.

"We also note that this amendment comes at a time when internationally-respected research is clear that there are both health and environmental imperatives for reducing the amount of meat we consume," added the committee. "In that context, we are concerned that the amendment may create a barrier for consumers who are trying to reduce their meat intake.

In evidence, chef Jackie Kearney, drawing on the example of a vegetarian chorizo-style sausage, had argued: “If the producer was not allowed to use that description, a customer might not know that they could slice it up, fry it and pop it into an omelette or on their pizza, and that it could replace pepperoni, which is not particularly good for them. We need to support people’s flexible choices towards plant-based eating. I believe that these crowd-pleasing terms are ways to reach such people; it is how we support that behaviour change.”

The committee concluded: "We acknowledge that the amendment is unlikely to apply directly to the UK, as it is part of the Common Agricultural Policy reform negotiations and so is unlikely to take effect until after the UK has left the EU. However, if it were implemented it would have implications for UK food businesses seeking to trade with the EU, and also speaks to the broader issue of ensuring that health and environmental objectives are properly integrated across the policy landscape."