Call for overhaul of ‘inconsistent’ food laws

Date: 22/01/1998

By Rory Watson

FOOD law in the European Union has become too muddled, complex and inconsistent and should be overhauled to bring it more into line with the changing environment.

That is the initial response from MEPs on the European Parliament's environment committee to the Commission's attempts to provoke a broad debate on whether existing legislation meets the needs and expectations of consumers, producers, manufacturers and traders.

The assessment of more than three decades of EU harmonisation of food legislation is being conducted in the wake of the BSE crisis and the Commission's decision to transfer much of the responsibility for food safety from its agricultural department to the Directorate-General for consumer affairs (DGXXIV).

"This makes the wide-ranging discussion currently taking place a matter of special importance, since changes in the area of food law will not just affect the food industry, agriculture and consumers in the Union, but will extend well beyond them," notes a report prepared by Austrian Socialist MEP Ilona Graenitz.

Not only do households spend an average of one-fifth of their income on food, but the agri-food industry also provides more than 2 million jobs. The Union is a major food exporter with an annual trading surplus of some 10 billion ecu.

At the heart of the environment committee's response to last year's Commission Green Paper on food law is a suggestion that a general framework directive on food be introduced to help consolidate and supplement existing legislation, and that emphasis on healthy eating and food quality be a central feature of the revised policy.

In a review of existing measures, the Commission is advised to root out contradictory legislation and loopholes in the law and replace these with specific proposals on the labelling of foodstuffs and authorisation for their sale.

The committee, which finalised its opinion this month, also stresses that the Union should aim to guarantee that high standards of food safety and preventive health care are maintained in the most efficient and consumer-friendly manner possible.

MEPs' concern to ensure that existing measures are made more user-friendly and that consumer interests are taken fully into account in future measures runs throughout the list of recommendations they have tabled.

They support the continued ban on advertisers claiming that a particular food is suitable for treating or curing disease, although they believe nutritional claims should be allowed provided that "they are based on sufficient and recognised scientific findings and if they are tested and confirmed by an independent body".

Graenitz acknowledges that the main source of consumer information at the moment is product labelling, but insists that for the data to be useful, it must be "readily understandable without the need for foreign-language dictionaries, pocket calculators or magnifying glasses".

She also recommends that thought be given to the opportunities opened up by the Internet and to the development of new forms of cooperation between customers and producers aimed at building consumer confidence.

When the Parliament debates the environment committee's report, probably during its March plenary session, it is expected to support the existing 'farm-to-table' approach, but to insist it be made more comprehensive by including environmental protection factors and details of production methods.

"The legislation now in preparation in Commission departments on liability and guarantees for all products, including primary products, is an important step in restoring consumer confidence," notes Graenitz, who insists that consumers and farmers must be kept fully informed of the properties of feeding stuffs and seeds used.

The Parliament is also likely to demand that consumer concerns should be taken more fully into account in international agreements affecting the food industry.

Its environment committee has pointed the way by suggesting that future World Trade Organisation agreements should "acknowledge the importance of legitimate consumer concerns, including ethical and religious concerns about certain methods of production", and that the "imperatives of health and safety must take precedence over free trade".

Report of the views of MEPs on the EP's Environment Committee.