WRITTEN QUESTION E-2294/99

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Council

(13 December 1999)

Subject: Amendment to the EU chocolate directive

In late October the Council adopted an amendment to the EU chocolate directive which results in a lowering of the cocoa standard for chocolate. Once the amended directive enters into force, chocolate producers will be able to use cheaper raw materials which are cocoa substitutes. In eight of the fifteen EU Member States the term chocolate is currently limited to products with 25 % cocoa components, 14 % milk and no vegetable fat.

This amendment to the cocoa directive will inflict serious social and economic damage on the cocoa-producing countries and the cocoa farmers. Moreover, the amended directive is clearly at variance with the international cocoa agreement of 1995 in which all cocoa-importing countries, including the fifteen Member States of the EU, undertook to encourage consumption of cocoa.

Can the Commission answer the following:

1. Who (Commission, Member States, chocolate producers) took the first step towards a lowering of the cocoa standard?

2. On the basis of what arguments and/or documents did the Council approve a lowering of the cocoa standard?

3. What EU Member States were advocates of a lowering of the cocoa standard? What arguments and/or documents have these Member States used in support of their position?

4. Did the Council carry out a study of the social and economic effects on the cocoa-producing countries and their farmers before lowering the cocoa standard? If so, what were the results of the study? If not, why did the Council neglect to carry out such a study, given the far-reaching social and economic impact on the cocoa-producing countries and their farmers?

5. Can the amended chocolate directive with the lower cocoa standard be reconciled with the international cocoa agreement of 1995 which sought to encourage the consumption of cocoa? If so, what are the Council's arguments in support of this position?

Reply

(10/11 April 2000)

As a preliminary remark, the Council would draw the Honourable Member's attention to the fact that the common position adopted by the Council with a view to the adoption of the Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council relating to cocoa and chocolate products maintains, for all the products in question, the minimum content of cocoa butter or total dry cocoa matter laid down by Directive 73/241/EEC currently in force.

It is therefore not a question of reducing the cocoa content, as the Honourable Member claims, but rather of permitting the addition of vegetable fats other than cocoa butter up to a maximum of 5 % of the finished product (cf. Article 2(1) of the common position), as some Member States already authorise the use of vegetable fat. The Council would point out that it decided to restrict these vegetable fats to six fats of tropical origin defined according to technical and scientific criteria as equivalents to cocoa butter, and

that enzyme treatment of these fats is prohibited. (A seventh fat coconut oil is allowed only for the manufacture of ice-creams and similar frozen products.)

In the common position referred to at the beginning of this reply, the Council judged that certain vertical Directives relating to foods should be simplified in order to take account only of the essential requirements to be met by the products they cover in order that those products may move freely within the internal market. The aim is not only to guarantee the single nature of the internal market but also to provide the consumer with correct, neutral and objective information in addition to the list of ingredients.

With regard to the social and economic impact on the cocoa-producing countries, Commission officials submitted a preliminary study of the impact of the proposed Directive on those countries producing cocoa and vegetable fats before the Council adopted its common position. In that preliminary study, the Commission concluded that the proposed Directive would probably not have any negative impact on the countries concerned. A second study will be initiated in order to remove any lingering doubts.

Regarding the same question, the Council makes provision in Article 2(4) of its common position for the Commission to carry out a study of the Directive's impact on the economies of those countries producing cocoa and other vegetable fats after the Directive in question enters into force. The Council would suggest that the Honourable Member contact the Commission directly for more details.

With specific regard to question 3, the Council would suggest that the Honourable Member contact the Member States themselves as it is not the Council's responsibility to provide details of individual positions.