In a recent commentary for Labour List, MP Terry Jermy welcomes the Defra Animal Welfare Strategy as a positive step, but criticises it for omitting Mandatory Method of Production (MMOP) labelling for meat and dairy products, a policy he and many supporters believe is essential for transparency and consumer trust. He argues that current supermarket labelling can mislead shoppers about how animals are raised, and that expanding clear welfare labelling (akin to the long-standing egg labelling scheme) would empower consumers, align purchasing with values, and ultimately “boost farm incomes” and benefit the economy.

A key theme of his piece is the claim that this would create a competitive advantage for British higher-welfare products. Jermy insists that MMOP labelling should also apply to imports, to avoid undercutting domestic farmers and processors with lower-welfare supply chains.

However, this push has hidden implications which may not be fully factored-in.

Meat processors know there are serious technical challenges associated with implementing new labelling standards. A good example is the practical difficulty of measuring and verifying welfare standards across complex and varied pig production systems. If the problem of distilling these systems into simple, consumer-facing label “shorthand” is not properly addressed, this risks creating regulatory pressure without clear or workable pathways for compliance, while still failing to deliver genuinely clearer information for consumers.

Mandatory labelling tied to welfare criteria, especially if strict definitions are set without industry-aligned technical guidance, could also produce unintended consequences. The recent Animal Welfare Strategy includes a recommendation to ban CO₂ stunning within the next five years. As we have commented before, this is not practical and is likely to create more problems than it solves.

It is useful to follow how this debate is playing out among the lawmakers who will ultimately set these rules. But they must understand that policies of this kind can only succeed if they are developed with serious input from industry on the real, on-the-ground implications.