Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the 'Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council and the Economic and Social Committee on food, veterinary and plant health control and inspection` (98/C 235/02)

On 30 January 1998 the European Commission decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, under Article 198 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-mentioned communication.

The Section for Protection of the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Affairs, which was instructed to prepare the Committee's work on this matter, adopted its opinion on 5 May 1998. The rapporteur was Mr Nielsen, with Mr Colombo and Mr Verhaeghe acting as co-rapporteurs.

At its 355th plenary session on 27 and 28 May 1998 (meeting of 27 May) the Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion with 81 votes in favour and 3 abstentions.

1. Introduction

1.1. In this Communication, which follows on the Communication on consumer health and food safety of April 1997 (), the Commission gives an overview of the measures adopted in connection with the introduction of the Commission's food, veterinary and plant health control services.

1.2. In addition, the Commission gives details of plans for future control activities, which are based on a food safety study and recommendations by its Inspection General Services (IGS) (IGS report) ().

1.3. In its 1996 opinion, the ESC was not convinced that the existing office should be converted into an agency (). In the light inter alia of this ESC opinion, the Commission has abandoned its proposal to set up a veterinary and plant health agency () and has come to the conclusion that responsibility for control and inspection should continue to be exercised (under the general authority of the Commission) by the Food and Veterinary Office (FVO) in Ireland, which is attached to DG XXIV.

1.4. The Commission still believes that food safety and protection of consumers' health can best be achieved through a working partnership between the food industry, the official control services at national level and the Commission, operating within the framework of effective legislation. The food industry needs to develop monitoring and self-policing systems to ensure that food at all stages of the production chain complies with EU rules. The national authorities should continue to exercise central authority and apply coordinated control programmes and audit-based control systems. The Commission also wishes to monitor the national control authorities' efficiency by means of such audit-based control systems.

1.5. Here the Commission endorses the IGS report's recommendations regarding the expansion of control, the scope for the common control services to work impartially and objectively, and a clearly defined legal and official status specifying the control services' mission, the functions and responsibilities of personnel, procedures, working methods, etc.

1.6. The concept of 'farmyard to table control` presupposes small, multidisciplinary inspection teams able to cover all aspects of the production chain, from animal feed processors through health and welfare standards on farms, markets and during transport, to the processing, storage, distribution and retail sale of the food concerned. In addition, it is proposed to set up a small number of emergency teams to respond immediately to public health, or animal and plant health crises in the EU.

2. General comments

2.1. The ESC wholeheartedly supports the Commission's efforts to give greater priority to consumers' health and food safety and is able to endorse the proposed shape of future control and inspection activities, subject to the following reservations and recommendations.

2.2. As mentioned below, it is of vital importance that the rules governing control activities as well as the framing of constructive and apposite procedures for cooperation between the Food and Veterinary Office and other inter-institutional or national bodies ensure that optimum use is made of the resources made available by the Commission and the Member States for control and inspection purposes. In this connection, control procedures must be streamlined as far as possible and close coordination is essential. A system that looks good on paper but is of no practical use could result in redtape and inefficiency, with a loss of support and trust. In this respect, the Committee welcomes any initiative directed towards coordination of national bodies active in this field.

2.3. According to the Commission, in 1997 there were 76 Council directives containing provisions on Commission monitoring or control of enforcement in Member States or third countries (57 in the veterinary sector, 16 on plant health and 3 on official control of food and food hygiene) ().

2.4. Regardless of the need to press ahead with simplifying the rules, additional rules and measures will no doubt have to be adopted in the years to come for certain components of the food, veterinary and plant health sector. Increasing problems e.g. in the field of microbiology can be expected to necessitate further expansion of EU legislation.

2.5. Further, the accession of the central and eastern European countries to the EU, with the addition of new borders and neighbouring countries, will per se substantially boost the need for, and scope of, the Commission's control and inspection activities, particularly in the veterinary sector. Here it is important that the applicant countries should incorporate EU regulations promptly so that any exemptions applicable during a transitional period are as shortlived as possible.

2.6. It is therefore vital for the EU to take energetic and efficient control and inspection measures to ensure enforcement of the regulations and achieve its goal of high safety and health standards in the sphere of food, veterinary and plant health. Effective, uniform enforcement of the relevant provisions, combined with harmonized rules for payment of control fees, is also a sine qua non in guaranteeing smooth operation of the single market and fair terms of competition. The Committee welcomes the Edinburgh Forum on enforcement of consumer-protection legislation (11-12 June 1998) which sets a precedent for cooperation and calls for follow-up in the food sector with regular meetings between the Member States' food enforcement officers in order to ensure consistency.

2.7. In this connection, the ESC is able to endorse the Commission's proposals on framing guidelines to ensure uniform application and coordinated national control programmes encompassing the entire food production chain and the introduction of audit-based control systems.

2.8. The ESC supports the idea of public access to information. As the Commission proposes, the Office's working methods should be open to public scrutiny and arrangements should also be made for an effective internal system to monitor management, based on the recommendations of the IGS report (see point 3.5).

2.9. The Commission's most recent decisions regarding on-the-spot veterinary checks () must, as the Commission itself advocates, be backed by speedy action. The ESC agrees that the results of inspection visits, in the shape of provision of information on shortcomings in the Member States' control systems, should be available on the Internet, in annual reports and at regular discussions between consumer and producer organizations. However, one condition must be that the Member States under criticism should have an opportunity, prior to publication, to comment on such information and correct misunderstandings. However, the publication of information relating directly or indirectly to individual undertakings would be in breach of Treaty Article 214 on confidential information concerning undertakings ().

2.10. The ESC also supports the Commission's idea of assessing the need for additional national control of safety standards for non-animal foodstuffs (e.g. fruit and vegetables) and, if need be, introducing further national or Community measures. However, the decisive factor must be the existence of such a need to avoid merely increasing the cost of control without sufficient justification.

2.11. Leaving aside the importance of continued prioritization of the food sector, compliance with EU rules on animal health and welfare remains a matter of key importance for operation of the single market, as borne out by the large volume of legislation on this subject.

2.12. In this connection, the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) has also warned against the risk of serious new epidemics of contagious animal diseases as a result of intensive livestock production, the increase in long-distance transport of animals and the opening of new trade routes to the Middle East and the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS), combined with unstable conditions and inadequate control and inspection of contagious animal diseases, notably in the Balkans. The threat comes not just from traditional contagious diseases but from new diseases such as BSE. Here the FAO stresses that it is most important for the European countries to have effective veterinary administrations.

2.13. In connection with the WTO negotiations on ways of reconciling free international trade in goods with such considerations as health and safety, the ESC calls on the Commission and the Council to do their utmost to insist on, and secure international acceptance for, the EU's control policy with a view to responding to the problems generated by liberalization of trade in the food, veterinary and plant health sector.

3. Specific comments

3.1. To date the Food and Veterinary Office has found it hard to carry out its duties because its staff is far too small. It is debatable whether a gradual increase over a number of years, in line with the IGS report's recommendations, to a total of 202 posts, including 127 A grade posts, is adequate in view of the future requirements described above.

3.2. Without making any concession on the need to recruit staff with the requisite qualifications and experience, the Commission's complex and time-consuming recruitment procedures need to be speeded up so that the Office can become fully operational as speedily as possible. Otherwise it will not be in a position to meet the professional and political expectations of its role within a foreseeable future. The end result could then be frustration and unfortunate setbacks.

3.3. The transfer of the Food and Veterinary Office to Ireland was decided at the November 1993 Summit of the Heads of State or Government and is therefore not a matter for discussion. Nonetheless the siting of the Office at Grange, a rural area 40 km north of Dublin does give rise to a number of difficulties from the angle of staff recruitment and the practical performance of its tasks. Accordingly, in connection with the forthcoming expansion, the Commission should consider carefully whether a more central location in Dublin would make it easier for the Office to operate efficiently and effectively.

3.4. At the same time care must be taken to ensure that the siting of the Office in Ireland does not lead to a duplicate administration in Brussels, generating confusion as to responsibility. The distribution of tasks among several directorates-general and the resulting need for information and coordination, will in itself inevitably necessitate a considerable strain on resources, regardless of the Commission's internal guidelines ().

3.5. The ESC supports the Commission's plans for stringent internal checks on management, including the setting up within the Food and Veterinary Office of an internal 'quality team` whose status would be independent of the Office's internal management structure, as required for such structures under the principles governing the role of inspection bodies.

3.6. The ESC, which counts amongst its members' representatives of all links in the chain, from primary production to consumption, attaches great importance to the Commission's future control and inspection activities and will follow developments with keen attention. The ESC expects to be kept informed of progress and to be consulted on further measures in this sphere.

Brussels, 27 May 1998.

The President

of the Economic and Social Committee

Tom JENKINS

() COM(97) 183, 30.4.1997.

() Inspection General Services (IGS) study of 13 October 1997 on food safety control bodies.

() ESC Opinion of 27 November 1996 on the establishment of a veterinary and plant health agency - OJ C 66, 3.3.1997, p. 43.

() COM(96) 223; OJ C 239, 17.8.1996, p. 9.

() COM(97) 183 Annex II.

() Commission Decisions 98/139/EC and 98/140/EC of 4.2.1998 concerning on-the-spot veterinary checks carried out by Commission experts in the Member States and third countries respectively (OJ L 38, 12.2.1998).

() Under Treaty Article 214, persons employed by the EU are forbidden 'to disclose information of the kind covered by the obligation of professional secrecy, in particular information about undertakings, their business relations or their cost components`.

() The principles governing the distribution of responsibilities, including internal information and consultation procedures, are described in the Commission's internal handbook of 4 July 1997. Responsibility for the scientific committees and control activities is assigned to DG XXIV. DG III (food), DG V (food-related and zoonotic diseases) and DG VI (veterinary and plant health sector) are responsible for drafting, implementing and enforcing legislation.