A website with detailed information on Australia's new labelling system for food and beverages was launched, welcomed by health experts, and then taken offline just 24 hours later.

The Health Department says it accidently made a draft version of the site accessible, but health groups said it looked fine.

The site is part of a new front-of-pack star-rating system to show the nutritional value of given food and beverages. It has become a contentious move to help public awareness, with the Australian Food and Grocery Council (AFGC) raising concerns over the cost of making the change.

The improved system is based on a new algorithm for ranking nutritional value. This formula has been the subject of most criticism in the lead-up to the launch, with dairy advocates saying it is weighted against them

Stakeholders were informed of the premature launch via email, with groups including Choice and the Heart Foundation saying it all looked fine.

Public Health Association CEO Michael Moore says it could have stayed online.

“The website came up and I checked through it and thought it was really going to be useful for industry who wants to use it and for consumers that can then understand about the healthiness of their food,” he told the ABC.

“And then of course I was disappointed about seven or eight hours later when it came down. I just thought it was a technical reason at first.

“I have heard a number of reasons as to why it was taken down but it seems to be that whatever the shenanigans behind it were, what we really want to see is the website put up again.

“We want to see that industry can apply the health star rating to food as they want to. It's a voluntary system and that way consumers can understand how healthy their food is.”

“[The site] looked good, it looked effective, it would work and industry could begin the process of using it,” he said.

A spokesperson for Assistant Minister for Health Fiona Nash, said the detal underpinning the site are still not complete.

“A website at this stage would be premature given that the cost-benefit analysis has not been done,” she said.

“The results of the cost-benefit analysis are to be presented at the next meeting of the [Ministerial and Governance Forum on Food Regulation] in June.”

“The cost-benefit analysis and the website will be discussed when the Forum next meets.”

The Australian Food and Grocery Council said costs are all-important too.

“Any additional regulation carries a cost to business and the AFGC has consistently argued for a robust and credible cost-benefit analysis to be undertaken,” an AFGC spokesperson said.

“It is particularly relevant in the wake of the SPC decision that any additional cost to food companies needs to be closely scrutinised.

“The full impact of the proposed scheme has not yet been fully assessed and we support the Assistant Health Minister Senator Nash's decision to implement a broader cost-benefit analysis.

“Once the cost-benefit analysis has been completed, companies can make a proper assessment of the proposed scheme.”

The website was briefly accessible at www.healthstarrating.com.au