Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the ' Proposal for a European Parliament and Council Directive amending European Parliament and Council Directive 94/35/EC on sweeteners for use in foodstuffs'
Date: 1996-03-27
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: approximation of laws, food additive, foodstuffs legislation, human nutrition, marketing restriction













EUR-Lex - 51996AC0406 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



51996AC0406

Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the ' Proposal for a European Parliament and Council Directive amending European Parliament and Council Directive 94/35/EC on sweeteners for use in foodstuffs'  


Official Journal C 174 , 17/06/1996 P. 0001 





Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the  'Proposal for a European Parliament and Council Directive amending European Parliament and Council  Directive 94/35/EC on sweeteners for use in foodstuffs`(96/C 174/01)On 4  December 1995  the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, under Article  100a of the Treaty  establishing the European Economic Community, on the above-mentioned proposal. The Section for Protection of the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Affairs, which was  responsible for preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its Opinion on 5  March  1996. The Rapporteur was Mr Koopman, the Co-Rapporteurs Mr Green and Mr de Knegt. At its 334th Plenary Session (meeting of 27  March 1996), the Economic and Social Committee adopted  the following Opinion by a majority vote in favour and one vote against, with two  abstentions. 1. IntroductionFramework Directive 89/107/EEC () stipulates that the use of various  types of additives is to be harmonized by means of specific directives. The sweeteners Directive  (), which it is now proposed to amend, was approved on 21  June 1994. In accordance with the  framework Directive, this Directive is based on the positive list principle. This means that only  those sweeteners listed in the annex to the Directive are authorized. This annex also lists all the  foodstuffs in which these sweeteners may be used, along with the maximum doses. The choice of the  positive list system reflects the importance that the EU attaches to restricting (severely) the use  of sweeteners in foodstuffs. 2. General comments2.1. Broadly speaking the Committee approves the Commission's proposals,  which do not affect the current policy on sweeteners. The only really substantial proposal concerns  an addition to the list of foodstuffs which may contain the authorized sweeteners. It is a feature  of our times that new foodstuffs are always appearing on the market and it is therefore only  reasonable that the list of foodstuffs which may contain sweeteners be updated periodically. 2.2. Although the Committee fully endorses the Community's reluctance where sweeteners are  concerned, it wonders whether the choice of a directive -  one based on Article  100a moreover - is  not taking a sledgehammer to crack a nutshell, especially as this major addition is already needed  after only a few years. Furthermore, it is to be expected that this list of foodstuffs will need  revising again in the not too distant future. 2.3. The Committee approves the other proposed amendments which relate entirely to technical  matters, such as definitions and clarifications. 3. Specific comments3.1. The Committee would like to help solve the problem referred to in point  2.2 above. It considers that the guarantees provided by the procedure laid down in Article  7(3)(a)  of Directive 94/35/EC are sufficient for the Commission to be authorized to adapt, where necessary,  the list of foodstuffs in which sweeteners may be used. This procedure allows the Commission to  adopt the measures envisaged if they are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee  for Foodstuffs. Member State participation in this procedure is safeguarded by representation on  the Standing Committee. A qualified majority is required for such opinions. 3.2. The directive procedure would then only need to be used for proposed changes to this category  if such a majority could not be reached in the Standing Committee or if the Standing Committee, for  whatever reason, does not issue an opinion. 3.3. The Committee would also like to reiterate a comment which it made in its Opinion on the  earlier proposal for a sweeteners Directive (), a comment which the Commission has yet to act upon.  In point 2.4.3 the Committee referred to the new system whereby names kept in the original language  were printed in capital letters; in spite of this, the name 'Essoblate` in the saccharin section was  printed in lower case. 3.4. Furthermore, the Commission followed yet another system in its proposal for a Decision on the  maintenance of national laws prohibiting the use of certain additives in the production of certain  foodstuffs (). Under this system the name would have to be printed in bold to indicate that only  Germany and Austria can benefit from the measure or it would have to be translated into all  Community languages. The Commission should opt for one system and stick to it. Done at Brussels, 27 March 1996. The Presidentof the Economic and Social CommitteeCarlos FERRER() OJ No L 40,  11. 2. 1989, p. 27.  () OJ No L 237, 10. 9. 1994, p. 3.  () OJ No C 332, 16. 12. 1992, p. 11.  () OJ No C 134, 1. 6. 1995, p. 20.