To go to main Food Law Index page, click here.
During the last few decades, food production and trade have become increasingly international in character. The European Community trades in food products with almost every corner of the earth, and our traders are constantly seeking new markets and products in newly emerging economies. At the same time - as we all know - there are growing concerns about food safety: with the changing market place, potential health hazards such as agents of zoonotic diseases and residues of medical products or other contaminants may travel with the foodstuffs and present new challenges to policy makers to develop adequate systems to safeguard human health. This is reflected in international agreements and obligations, and in an enhanced role for international organisations such as Codex Alimentarius and the International Office of Epizootics.
Changing patterns of food-borne disease are also reflected in the development of EU food safety legislation. At present, a wide range of food safety issues is already covered by Community rules. These rules apply to all foods placed on the market in the Community, whether produced domestically or imported from third countries, and include in particular:
It is not possible to describe now all of these rules in detail, but let me just highlight the areas in which the Commission is responding to new food safety challenges and to the expectations of consumers and industry for a higher level of health protection.
It is clearly in the interest of all concerned, primary producers processors, distributors retailers and final consumers - that food safety rules and standards are consistent, coherent and transparent. The Community hygiene rules are at present scattered throughout a large number of Directives, which has lead to problems of transparency and to difficulties of interpretation. In order to resolve this situation, I announced in June 1995 my intention to simplify food hygiene legislation with a view to presenting a single, coherent, transparent and more user friendly piece of legislation. I will be notably guided by three main objectives:
Meeting these objectives is the best and only guarantee that consumer confidence and people well being are enhanced.
Our exercise in simplification of health rules regarding the production and marketing of animal products is well advanced. Based on a wide consultation of all interested groups, including industry, trade, farmers, consumers and Member State representatives, a final text is under preparation for submission, after further internal consultation within the Commission, to the European Parliament and the Council of Ministers. This text pursues the following general objectives:
Although the zoonoses Directive is an essential element in consumer protection, it is not a sufficient one and is difficult to implement. In order to limit or avoid from the outset the entry of micro-organisms such as salmonellae into the food chain in addition to good manufacturing practices in food processing establishments, measures must be taken at farm level.
The zoonoses Directive must also help ensure that a proper food borne disease reporting system is established, so as to allow food legislation to be adapted quickly to the hazards occurring at a given time.
I believe that current official inspection systems are unsatisfactory. In a number of cases they are designed to detect problems which were common some decades ago, but which are no longer the most serious food-related hazards. Certain diseases such as glanders and brucellosis have been reduced to relatively insignificant levels by application of the inspection procedures established for that purpose. Other emerging hazards should now be addressed step by step by the development of efficient risk assessment techniques and inspection procedures adapted to current risks.
For instance, we must stand ready to re-deploy food control officers, for example by taking them away from repetitive tasks on production lines and concentrating their efforts on the prevention of hazards nearer to their source. In addition, the inspection methods which in certain cases largely rely on organoleptic evaluations should be critically examined, since such methods cannot be expected to detect, for example, the presence of zoonotic diseases agents and pre-harvest contamination. All of these questions should be carefully examined and scientifically evaluated. At the same time, we must ensure that our legal and administrative structures provide for sufficient flexibility to apply new systems and procedures as the need arises.
This is, in addition to the simplification exercise, one of the major challenges facing us in the near future.
Eighteen months ago, a situation arose which illustrates several of the points I have mentioned. I refer, of course, to the BSE crisis.
In view of the potentially disastrous effects of a possible outbreak of disease in the human population, the Community took a precautionary approach. The Commission, supported by its Scientific Veterinary Committee, decided that it would be prudent to exclude the use of certain ruminant tissues from food and animal feed.
This proposal met strong resistance from a number of Member States, who were unwilling to admit that they had, or could have a problem and were consequently unwilling to introduce the necessary changes.
We persisted and succeeded in adopting the necessary legislation, but we needed almost a year, and two difficult meetings of the Council of Ministers. Even then, several Member States remained unpersuaded of the need for precautionary measures. This example demonstrates that changes to Community health rules, even in the face of new and serious problems, are not achieved easily. And the key role the European Commission can play with its inspections, legislative initiatives and surveillance for the preservation of human and animal health.
Let me end with a few words about the international trading system introduced by the conclusion of the Uruguay GATT round and the establishment of the World Trade Organization.
I have referred briefly to the standards, recommendations and guidelines of Codex Alimentarius and the International Office of Epizootics, which have assumed a new importance in international trade in animals and animal products. This enhanced role for these organizations has arisen because the so called SPS Agreement within the WTO has adopted their texts as reference documents for countries introducing health requirements for trade in foodstuffs.
In the past, the members of OIE and Codex took a relatively relaxed and flexible attitude to adopting recommendations as they were not considered to be legally binding and could be applied as appropriate. In particular, the developing countries found them useful as guidelines: even if they did not have the infrastructure necessary to apply all of the details the recommendations of the international organizations gave them a benchmark to aim at.
Regrettably, the adoption of the international guidelines as reference texts for the SPS Agreement has fundamentally changed the attitude of countries to the work of Codex and OIE. In the meeting of the Codex Alimentarius Commission in June many countries expressed strong reservations about adopting texts which in the past would have been acceptable to them, but which may now involve them in legally binding obligations which they cannot meet. In addition, although the SPS Agreement allows for countries to take stronger action than provided for by international recommendations, in practice this may be difficult to justify in view of legal precedents now being set by WTO disputes panels.
This state of affairs is highly undesirable from the point of view of public health because the valuable work which has been done in the past by the international organizations is now becoming paralyzed. The Community is a strong supporter of the WTO and we were active in promoting the adoption of the SPS Agreement, in order to prevent spurious health claims from blocking international trade. At the same time, we maintain a high level of health protection and we will not hesitate to take the necessary action when the health of Community consumers is at risk, even if that means going beyond the recommendations of Codex.
The SPS Agreement is due for review next year, and I am of the opinion that this review must reconsider the role of the international organizations in setting health standards applicable to trade. We must find a way to maintain their role in continuing to improve worldwide health standards without imposing unreasonable requirements on developing countries or preventing developed countries from maintaining a high level of health protection.