Chocolate sets sticky problem for MEPs

Date: 27/02/1997

By Simon Coss

DIVISIONS are emerging within the European Parliament over controversial proposals aimed at settling once and for all the long-running dispute over the definition of 'chocolate'.

In a draft report due to be presented to the Parliament's environment committee in April, Belgian Green MEP Paul Lannoye will urge members not to reject the European Commission's plan.

If they accept Lannoye's arguments, members of the committee will come into direct conflict with their colleagues on the Parliament's development committee, which gave the Commission's proposals a thumbs-down late last year. “If we reject the proposals we will simply be in the same position we are in now which is not at all satisfactory,” said an aide to Lannoye.

The MEP will suggest a modification to the current Commission plan which would allow the name 'chocolate' to be used for products containing up to 5&percent; non-cocoa fat if it came from an African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) country. If the origin of the vegetable fat could not be guaranteed in this way, then the name 'chocolate' could only be used on products containing cocoa butter.

The move is designed to allay fears that the economies of ACP countries would be hit hard by the proposed new rules.

Lannoye's suggestions have been cautiously welcomed by the chocolate industry. “We have no official position as yet, but judging by our past statements I would have thought we would be favourable to the proposal,” said Arnold Van Hecke, director of Caobisco, which represents many major chocolate makers.

The view from cocoa-producing states is less clear. “Obviously, we would like to see only cocoa butter used in chocolate products, but this compromise would be acceptable to us as long as it can be guaranteed that the non-cocoa fat comes from ACP countries,” said Alex Abankwa, Ghana's ambassador to the EU and Belgium.

But he went on to insist that any non-cocoa fat - including that from ACP states - must be clearly labelled on chocolate products. This is exactly the sort of 'prejudicial' labelling which many chocolate-makers object to and suggests that basic divisions over the issue remain.

Member states are divided on the subject. Belgium, France, Italy and the Netherlands are opposed to allowing non-cocoa fats to be used in products called 'chocolate'. All have renowned 'quality' chocolate industries. Eight other member states support the change, including Denmark, Sweden, the UK and Austria, all of whom allow vegetable fats to be used in chocolate production.

The Commission's proposals are concerned with the sale and labelling rather than the production of chocolate. If adopted, member states would have to allow products from other member states to be sold on their territory, but would not have to alter their own chocolate-making rules.