Battle lines are drawn over legislation on novel foods

Date: 07/03/1996

THE conflicting interests of consumer champions and food manufacturers will be paraded in Strasbourg next week when MEPs give their verdict on new EU legislation on novel foods such as genetically-modified tomatoes.

The European Parliament's environment committee has raised a banner for consumers. In contrast to Union governments, it foresees a more ambitious role for the new legislation by giving it wider scope to assess the safety of such foods and to insist on detailed labelling of their contents.

Promoting the committee's stance, the rapporteur and German Socialist MEP Dagmar Roth-Behrendt explained this week: “This covers all the crucial areas where the Council of Ministers failed to deliver a proper common position in the interests of Europe's 370 million consumers.”

But opposing voices in the Parliament are expected to warn that the legislation could impose hefty costs on food manufacturers, lead to unnecessary delays and create extra layers of bureaucracy.

Novel foods are produced by synthesis, chemical or physical treatment of existing foods, or by using genetic engineering to modify micro-organisms, plants or animals. Techniques are used to improve the taste, flavour and shelf-life of fruit and vegetables or, as in the case of sugar beet, to protect them against pests during growth. They can also ensure that fruits such as strawberries do not die during snap cold periods.

The draft legislation to be voted on by the Parliament on 13 March is designed to protect consumers and set down rules on the safety, sale and labelling of such products.

The environment committee argues that product safety depends not just on the food in question, but also on the process used to make it. It wants the rules on genetically-modified organisms to cover not just organisms such as tomatoes which can be propagated, but also non-propagable items such as ketchup. MEPs are being asked by the committee to make consumer protection paramount by rejecting governments' wish for a fast-track authorisation approach for certain products.

But the greatest battle is likely to be over labelling. The environment committee wants food manufacturers to provide consumers with clear details on the composition, nutritional value and intended use of the food, if these specific items are different from an existing food or ingredient.

Some firms already provide this for items such as tomato ketchup, purée, Cheddar cheese and detergents, but others fear such detail may deter consumers or involve extra costs.

To be accepted, the amendments being put to the Parliament must be supported by at least 314 of the 627 MEPs. Any that fail to cross that hurdle will fall. Any that succeed will involve EU governments and MEPs in a conciliation procedure to try and iron out their differences.