WORLD TRADE G/SPS/GN/7
5November 1996
ORGANIZATION(96-4666)
Original: English Committee onSanitary andPhytosanitary Measures
DEVELOPMENT AND APPLICATION OFRESIDUE LIMITS
TOFOODS INTRADE UNDER WTO SPSPRINCIPLES -
PAPER PREPARED BYAUSTRALIA
(G/SPS/W/34 of14November 1995)
Statement made bytheEuropean Community
atthemeeting of8-9October 1996
TheEuropean Community welcomes theanalysis carried outbyAustralia ontheimportant
subject oftheestablishment andenforcement ofMRLs forpesticides andveterinary medicines. The
paper inraising several important issues should provide auseful basisfordiscussion leading hopefully
togreater mutual understanding andultimately toincreased consumer protection whilst facilitating trade.
Ofthe"Issues forconsideration" listed inparagraph 22ofthedocument, theCommunity can
fullysupport thewidest possible adoption atnational levelofCodex MRLs andthetaking intoaccount
oftrading partners 'Good Agricultural Practices (GAPs) andGood Veterinary Practice (GVP). Indeed,
theCommunity isconsidering theinclusion ofprovisions initsnextregulation covering theregistration
ofplantprotection products, which would invite registrants tosupply thenecessary information inorder
toallow theestablishment ofMRLs which would recognize theneeds oftrading partners.
Itisassumed thatthereference toamechanism tosetMRLs onatemporary basisisforthose
caseswhere dataissomewhat lacking. Whilst theCommunity would besympathetic totheestablishment
oftemporary MRLs inexceptional circumstances andonashort termbasis, itfeelsthatinthelonger
termitwould bemore efficient toagree, atinternational level, minimum datarequirements forthe
establishments ofimport tolerances. Inanycase, temporary MRLs could under nocircumstances be
envisaged where theshortfall wasfortoxicological data.
TheCommunity hassome doubts about thefeasibility oftheproposal tosystematically review
allnilordefault tolerances. Itwould bemore efficient forallconcerned iftheexisting possibilities
were fullyutilized bycountries topetition theirtrading partners forrequired import tolerances. It
isexpected thatsuchamechanism would onlyneedtobetriggered inrelatively fewcases.
Asfarasthebodyofthepaperisconcerned,theCommunityfeelsthatthetextcouldbeimproved
bythefollowing clarifications:
Paragraph 2-theprocedure forestablishing aMRL forpesticides usedonplants orarising
from afeedingstuff needs tobecompleted. Noreference ismade inthepresent texttothe
quantification ofresidues through residue trialstudies orfeeding studies. Inthisparagraph
itwould beappropriate toclearly differentiate between theprocedures forestablishing MRLs
forpesticides, veterinary medicine andcontaminants. Itisassumed thatthetextisnotintended
toaddress issues relating tofoodadditives, although there isreference throughout thetextto
residues arising fromchemicals. Therefore, thescope ofthedocument needs tobeclarified.
./.G/SPS/GN/7
Page2
Thedocument gives insufficient recognition totheexistence ofpossible acute toxic effects in
addition tochronic effects. Thetextcould beimproved byaddressing thespecial problems
posed bycertain residues which giverisetoacute toxiceffects, where anindividual ormultiple
meal portions overashort period oftimeismore relevant toriskassessment thandietary
exposure overalifetime. Inclusion ofthispointwould bring thetextintolinewithinternational
developments.
Finally, more balance isneeded between therequirement forfacilitating trade andprotecting
consumer health. Itisnecessary torecognize thatsimplification andaccelerated procedures
must notbeatthecostofcompromising ahighlevelofconsumer protection.