WRITTEN QUESTION E-0812/02

by Michl Ebner (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(25 March 2002)

Subject: Microfiltration of raw milk

With reference to Mr Byrne's answer to Written Question E-3071/01(1), it is true to say that microfiltration is an advanced technology when practised in dairies, as it is used there for special purposes, e.g. to separate certain milk fractions.

It is not true, however, to say that microfiltration is used only by industry and requires expensive equipment. It is possible to buy all the technology needed to separate the somatic cells in raw milk on a producer's holding for as little as EUR 1 500. Simple technology requiring no specialist know-how suffices, and a wide selection is available via the internet. The technology quickly pays for itself in the case of suppliers producing as little as 100 litres of milk per day, and even more quickly in the case of those who produce large quantities of milk. If technology is used to reduce the cell count of raw milk before it is delivered to dairies, suppliers get more money for their milk than is warranted by its actual quality. This is because they remove the measurable parameter for the cell count before the raw milk is sampled. And they are doing so to the detriment of honest suppliers.

Such suppliers are also circumventing the rules on limit values for raw milk which may be supplied pursuant to Directive 92/46/EEC(2) (Annex A, Chapter IV). They can avoid a possible supply ban, which would mean financial losses for suppliers.

It is extremely difficult to prove that microfiltration has been carried out on the farm, as small devices are used which can be used when needed and are easily removed. Milk suppliers mostly use microfiltration equipment only during a milking period. Otherwise, the cell count would be too low, as microfiltration can reduce the cell count by up to 80 %. However, even if it is possible to prove that microfiltration is being used, dairies have scarcely any grounds for action if its use is not expressly prohibited by law.

The issue is not microfiltration at milk-processing establishments, where its use is of course justified and is often required to ensure high-quality products.

The issue here is the introduction of an explicit ban on the use of microfiltration on production holdings, so that milk must be delivered in an unaltered state to milk-processing establishments.

Will the Commission provide an answer regarding this matter and do its utmost to stop the use of microfiltration on production holdings?

(1) See page 1.

(2) OJ L 268, 14.9.1992, p. 1.

Joint answerto Written Questions E-0809/02, E-0810/02 and E-0812/02given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(14 May 2002)

The definition of raw milk and linked thereto, the technique of micro-filtration of milk, is a subject that is under debate in the Parliament and the Council as a consequence of the Commission proposals on food hygiene(1). In both institutions amendments are proposed to the original Commission proposal with a view to clarifying the definition of raw milk and the micro-filtration thereof. These clarifications tend to re-introduce the definition of raw milk that is included in current Community legislation, and in particular in Council Directive 92/46/EEC 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(2). Such definition would be drafted along the following lines: Raw milk means milk produced by the secretion of the mammary gland of farmed animals that has not been heated to more than 40 °C or undergone any further treatment. In that definition the reference to micro-filtration is deleted.

The Commission is re-considering its position on this matter and recognises the force of the argument that the standards for raw milk must apply to the milk before collection from the farm without being altered artificially.

(1) OJ C 365 E, 19.12.2000.

(2) OJ L 268, 14.9.1992.