WRITTEN QUESTION P-2286/99

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(24 November 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.

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 Commission 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 Commission 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 Commission 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 Commission's arguments in support of this position?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(20 January 2000)

On 28 October 1999 the Council adopted a common position on cocoa and chocolate products. The objective is to simplify and replace Council Directive 73/241/EEC of 24 July 1973 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to cocoa and chocolate products intended for human consumption(1), in accordance with the conclusions of the 1992 Edinburgh European Council, which undertook to simplify legisation in the food sector.

The common position was adopted by a qualified majority. Belgium and the Netherlands voted against and Luxembourg abstained.

An important aim of the common position is to resolve the question of the use of vegetable fats other than cocoa butter in the manufacture of chocolate; at present the use of these fats is permitted in only seven Member States. The Council felt that complete harmonisation of these materials was the only way to ensure the free movement of all chocolate products and the establishment of the internal market in this sector. It therefore introduced a provision authorising the addition of these fats to chocolate products throughout the Community. At the same time, however, the common position severely restricts the use of these fats, defining them according to technical and scientific criteria and establishing a list of six specific fats, which are of tropical origin. With regard to labelling, the common position lays down very clear rules to ensure that consumers are correctly informed.

It should be noted that, contrary to what the Honourable Member believes, the fats not derived from cocoa beans are added to chocolate as an optional ingredient, and do not replace the minimum quantities laid down by the Directive for cocoa or cocoa butter. Article 2(1) of the common position states that the addition of vegetable fats is authorised only under certain conditions and without reducing the minimum content of cocoa butter or total dry cocoa matter. Therefore, the addition of these fats, under certain conditions, does not make the manufactured product less like chocolate, provided of course that all the criteria for chocolate (including the content of substances derived from cocoa beans) are met.

The proposal for a Directive(2) does not run counter to the international cocoa agreement. First, cocoa consumption is steadily rising in the Community. Second, the proposal lays down labelling rules to prevent the customer being misled. Moreover, seven Member States which signed the agreement and which authorise the use of vegetable fats did not believe that the use of these fats ran counter to these clauses.

With regard to the Directive's impact on the economies of the cocoa-producing countries, the Commission did a study which indicated that the chocolate market was flourishing and does not foresee any adverse affects on the economies of the developing countries. Nonetheless, it undertook to present a report four years after the Directive is adopted.

The Commission believes that the common position adopted by the Council safeguards all the interests at stake, including those of the developing countries. The substance of the common position corresponds to a large extent to the wishes expressed by Parliament at first reading. It has now been sent to Parliament for a second reading.

(1) OJ L 228, 16.8.1973.

(2) COM(95) 722 final.