Buoyant roadside honey sales since lockdown

[ericbeaumont]

Please don't let's argue this point again. It is not against any regulations. It is personal choice!

Although there is no UK law preventing the use of the word raw it is regarded as without merit by ACTSO, the Association of Chief Trading Standards officers, who discussed the matter in 2017.

Beecraft reported the meeting and interpreted the verdict:

They didn’t like the term raw because they thought it implied properties above and beyond ‘honey’. They consider that the composition of honey is not altered by the usual permitted heat application (up to about 45 °C), and that the term ‘raw’ could therefore be applied to all honey. If it is heated to the point where enzymes are destroyed (temperature undefined), it becomes ‘baker’s honey’. Therefore, raw honey has no special characteristics and the term becomes misleading.

The weak point of this determination is that the Chief TSOs have no authority (it would seem) to direct TS officers in England and Wales to enforce the conclusion of the meeting.

Instead they left it to the discretion of each TS department to enforce or not as the whim takes them, with the result that producers end up in a no-man's-land of fluffy nothing where you can do what you like. Occasionally a TS will perk up and take action, and I know of one honey producer who was issued with a TS enforcement notice and told to cease the use of the word raw.

Given the fog of confusion surrounding the definition of the word by both producer and consumer you may conclude that it's best avoided; beefarmer Neil Pont agrees and has this to say: Our honey is extracted without heating. It is not pasteurised. It is not filtered – only coarse strained. Some people choose to describe honey produced by this method as ‘Raw Honey’. By this definition all honey sold legally in the UK would be described as “raw”, however at Ponts’ honey we see no need to over emphasise the quality of our honey and mislead customers. The taste of our Pure English Honey speaks for itself.

Well put?

 

[jenkinsbrynmair]

It's also the stance the BFA is taking.
TSO's in Carmarthenshire have warned Honey producers against using the words 'raw' and also 'pure' as both can be subject to personal interpretation

 

[enrico]

I look forward to the enforcement notice!

 

[beepeggy]

Yes because we are the only ones to have tested for glyphosate. Think about it 560 x the legal limit .. not quite enough to use honey as a week killer.

Is this post in the wrong thread?

 

[Erichalfbee]

Is this post in the wrong thread?

Yes but I can’t move it without disrupting the whole thread.
Maybe @Jowlpost could repost and add more detail in the appropriate section

 

[beeno]

Yes, and TS can enforce by law that a person takes all their 'raw' honey off the shelves and relabels it.
Labelling honey as 'raw' infers it has superior properties to 'ordinary' honey.

That's why my sign says raw but my label says cold strained. We all know what raw milk is but I have not seen that on any label either but unpasteurised.

 

[North End Bees]

That's why my sign says raw but my label says cold strained.

The sign is an extension of the label! It's advertising. So you're going to hide the sign when the TSOs come round??

 

[enrico]

The sign is an extension of the label! It's advertising. So you're going to hide the sign when the TSOs come round??

I wouldn't hide mine. I would prove the point!

 

[Repwoc]

Although there is no UK law preventing the use of the word raw it is regarded as without merit by ACTSO, the Association of Chief Trading Standards officers

Are you saying that ACTSO can override the law or make their own laws? Surely that is solely in the remit of government.

 

[ericbeaumont]

Are you saying that ACTSO can override the law or make their own laws? Surely that is solely in the remit of government.

No.

Perhaps you have yet to follow the link and read the Beecraft article, which stated that ACTSO is (or was) a voluntary group; however, one would presume that if its view carried weight it would influence policy.

Whether policy equates to law I cannot say, but certainly some TSOs in England and Wales are working to prevent the use of raw to describe honey, and doing so (we presume) lawfully and in line with policy.

 

[Repwoc]

No.

Perhaps you have yet to follow the link and read the Beecraft article,

So nothing they say that isn't in law is enforceable then.

I did read it some time ago - I guess you've probably linked to it before.

 

[North End Bees]

So nothing they say that isn't in law is enforceable then.

Yes, it is enforceable by law. Some TSOs interpret the rules more leniently than others but if your local one makes that decision it stands in law.

 

[Repwoc]

Yes, it is enforceable by law. Some TSOs interpret the rules more leniently than others but if your local one makes that decision it stands in law.

So is the law whatever the local TSO says? Surely that can't be the case.

 

[North End Bees]

So is the law whatever the local TSO says? Surely that can't be the case.

Local interpretation. But still enforceable.

 

[Repwoc]

the rules

Could you elaborate what you mean by "the rules"?

 

[Murox]

So is the law whatever the local TSO says? Surely that can't be the case.

Broadly it can. Uk does not have a written constitution . But its constitution exists in hundreds of acts. Some are more 'significant' than others and the supreme court recognises that, eg. Magna Carta.

 

[Repwoc]

Local interpretation.

That implies that the law is in place and the TSOs are enforcing it. That is their remit - not making up law as they see fit.

 

[Repwoc]

Broadly it can. Uk does not have a written constitution . But its constitution exists in hundreds of acts. Some are more 'significant' than others and the supreme court recognises that, eg. Magna Carta.

But the acts are all documented, not just made up on the hoof and at the whim of a local government official.

 

[Murox]

But the acts are all documented, not just made up on the hoof and at the whim of a local government official.

Cant disagree with that . However, look how Johnson and others exploit loopholes. As a political tool the constitution is both flexible and susceptible – laws/rules are altered or decisions made without due process. Been happening for a long time.

 

[North End Bees]

That implies that the law is in place and the TSOs are enforcing it. That is their remit - not making up law as they see fit.

They are not making it up as they see fit. They are interpreting it, which is quite different.
The courts are full every day of cases in which the law is interpreted. Sometimes in a ground breaking case, certain interpretations result in overall changes to the law, though usually not.
(Obviously not talking specifically beekeeping here but the principle is identical.)