WRITTEN QUESTION P-0352/02

by Francesco Fiori (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(6 February 2002)

Subject: Classification of fresh pasteurised milk

Current Community legislation on the labelling, presentation and advertising of food products lays down rules to protect the consumer, stipulating that packages should clearly indicate not only the exact nature but also the characteristics of products.

Community legal provisions concerning the production and marketing of milk for human consumption do not cover the product classified as fresh pasteurised milk, but only the more general category of pasteurised milk.

The specific provisions laid down in Italian Law No 169 of 3 May 1989 are still fully and legitimately applicable in their entirety, since over the years they have not been subjected to any modification or censure at Community level.

The circular of 2 August 2000 issued by the Ministry for Manufacturing authorised, in blatant contrast with the provisions of joint legislation for the protection of consumers' rights, the sale in Italy of products which, whilst also labelled as fresh pasteurised milk, not only differ in taste and quality, but also have a different shelf life.

This initiative seems to be in blatant conflict with the aims of European legislation on the labelling of food products, in particular the provisions of EU Directive 13/2000(1), since it is likely to mislead consumers and not allow them to make informed and wise choices.

Does the Commission intend to take further steps to:

- censure the Italian Ministry's initiative;

- put forward proposals to guarantee accurate consumer information regarding the actual freshness of milk marketed for direct human consumption;

- specify clearly that the freshness of milk for direct human consumption is closely linked not only to the short time elapsing between the milking of the cow and its reaching the final consumer, but also the shelf life, which should not have been extended by the use of processes other than or additional to low-temperature pasteurisation.

(1) OJ L 109, 6.5.2000, p. 29.

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(8 March 2002)

Directive 2000/13/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 March 2000 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the labelling, presentation and advertising of foodstuffs lays down general rules on labelling that are applicable to all pre-packaged foodstuffs.

Article 3 of this Directive lists the particulars that must be mentioned on the labelling, the first of which that is mentioned being the name under which the product is sold.

Article 5(1) of this Directive stipulates that the name under which a foodstuff is sold must be the name provided for in the Community provisions applicable to it or, in the absence of such provisions, the name provided for in the provisions applicable in the Member State in which the product is sold to the final consumer.

However, Article 5(1)(b) states that the sales name under which the product is legally manufactured and marketed in the Member State of production must also be allowed in the Member State of marketing, possibly accompanied, where necessary, by other descriptive information.

Under the terms of Article 5(1)(c), the sales name of the Member State of production may only be refused in the Member State of marketing in exceptional cases, when the foodstuff which it designates is so different, as regards its composition or manufacture, from the foodstuff known under that name that the provisions of point (b) are not sufficient to ensure correct information for consumers in the Member State of marketing.

As far as fresh pasteurised milk is concerned, the Commission has no information to conclude that this name should be refused in Italy, in application of the above provisions, for products from other Member States.

The Community health rules or the legislation on labelling define neither the concept of freshness, which is more of an organoleptic concept, nor the durability of pasteurised milk. The latter parameter is often determined by the operator that places the product on the market and takes account of not only food safety objectives (microbiological criteria) but also the development of the quality of the product over time (e.g. preservation of nutritional characteristics, vitamin content, appearance of the product, etc.), even though this organoleptic development does not in itself compromise the safety of the product.

Council Directive 92/46/ECC of 16 June 1992 laying down the health rules for the production and placing on the market of raw milk, heat-treated milk and milk-based products(1) states in Annex C, Chapter I, Paragraph 4, only that pasteurised milk must have been obtained by means of a treatment involving a high temperature for a short time (at least 71,7 °C for 15 seconds or any equivalent combination) or by a pasteurisation process using different time and temperature combinations to obtain an equivalent effect,

namely a negative reaction to the phosphatase test and a positive reaction to the peroxidase test. Heat treatment which goes beyond the minimum conditions for pasteurisation may lead to the inactivation of the peroxidase enzyme, which results in a negative reaction to the test. The presence of peroxidase is thus an essential characteristic of pasteurised milk.

It is correct that the durability of a milk is closely linked to its method of preservation, and ranges from several days for pasteurised milk kept in the refrigerator to several weeks for ultra-high temperature (UHT) milk kept at room temperature. However, both the labelling and the methods of presentation in shops (refrigerated retail display cabinets) generally make it possible for consumers to obtain sufficient information on these two parameters.

Moreover, the concept of freshness could not be made the subject of a general definition applicable to all products, but would have to correspond to specific criteria drawn up for each type of product; given that products considered to be fresh products are generally marketed at local level, there has been no need to lay down these criteria at Community level.

The Commission does not have sufficient information on the procedure used to produce the milk to which the Honourable Member refers. It is essential to have a more detailed description of this procedure in order to assess whether the labelling of this product complies with Community legislation.

However, even though there is no strict definition of fresh milk at Community level, the Member States must at least enforce the general provisions of Article 2 of Directive 2000/13/EC, which stipulates that the labelling of foodstuffs must not be such as could mislead the purchaser as to the characteristics, nature, properties, method of manufacture or production of these foodstuffs, or attribute to them properties which they do not possess.

(1) OJ L 268, 14.9.1992.