Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the 'Proposal for a European Parliament and Council Directive amending European Parliament and Council Directive 95/2/EC on food additives other than colours and sweeteners'
Date: 1996-12-18
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: approximation of laws, consumer protection, food additive, foodstuff, foodstuffs legislation













EUR-Lex - 51996AC1504 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



51996AC1504

Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the 'Proposal for a European Parliament and Council Directive amending European Parliament and Council Directive 95/2/EC on food additives other than colours and sweeteners'  


Official Journal C 075 , 10/03/1997 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 95/2/EC on food additives other than colours and sweeteners` (97/C 75/01)On 8 October 1996 the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, under Article 100A of the Treaty setting up the European 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 2 December 1996. The rapporteur was Mr Gardner, co-rapporteurs were Mr Colombo and Mrs Davison.At its 341st Plenary Session (meeting of 18 December 1996), the Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 56 votes to one, with no abstentions.1. Introduction1.1. The General Additives Directive (95/2/EC) attempts to lay down a definitive list of all uses for food additives other than colours and sweeteners and to take account of all the rich variety of foods throughout the EC. It was finalized after very long negotiations in February 1995.1.2. This proposal is a simple amending directive. It mainly involves applications of existing additives. It is already urgent to take account of:a) foods in new Member States;b) uses that were not notified when the original directive was drafted;c) new safety evaluations by the Scientific Committee for Food (SCF);d) technical progress;e) need to clarify the existing text;f) changes introduced without sufficient evaluation during the last minute bargaining prior to adoption.1.3. Unless this amending directive is adopted by 25 March 1997, a number of existing foods will become illegal and can no longer be sold. Unfortunately the procedures under Article 100A are now so complex and lengthy that there is a good chance that this deadline will not be met.2. General comments2.1. The Committee approves the proposal as necessary and urgent subject to the comments below.2.2. The amendment procedure2.2.1. Originally the Commission proposed () that such amendments should be done by a Committee procedure involving the Standing Committee for Foodstuffs, which seemed sensible given their highly technical nature. When the framework Additive Directive was finalized this was changed to a (then) Council procedure. The complicated procedures introduced by Maastricht result in an extremely long time scale () for this and it therefore becomes very difficult to adapt additives to new developments.2.2.2. There is a real need for having a procedure which involves the citizen adequately while being more responsive to new needs resulting from technical progress and changes in safety evaluation. The Committee therefore suggests the following compromise:- Changes involving new additives should continue by a Council and Parliament procedure.- Changes involving only changes in application should be made by the Standing Committee procedure. In this case there would have to be prior consultation of the various socio-economic partners represented on the Advisory Committee for Food.2.3. Health limitations2.3.1. In several cases such as fruit acids, additives are limited to particular applications though there appear to be no safety grounds for that. In general if there are no health limitations it is best to have the widest choice of alternatives on the list, thus reducing the consumption of any particular additive.2.4. Austrian language terms2.4.1. In the German version the Austrian terms have to be added as required by Protocol No 10 of the Austrian Act of Accession.3. Detailed comments3.1. Annex3.1.1. Section 3The Committee is not convinced that all the additives listed in this section are really needed in plain pasteurised cream.3.1.2. Section 9The proposal on 'Gehakt` would bring the additive list of Dutch minced meat in line with pre-packed preparations of fresh minced meat of all other countries. At the very least the two should be combined into one minced meat category.However the whole directive could be made less prescriptive by eliminating pre-packed preparations of fresh minced meat from Annex II altogether. All the additives involved are already in Annex I. (This also applies in many other cases, see 2.3. above).3.1.3. Section 11This deals with preservatives. Here the recent report (35th series, 1996) of the SCF is very relevant.This gives a relatively high ADI (Acceptable Daily Intake) for Sorbates. It therefore seems sensible to encourage the use of Sorbates over other preservatives such as Benzoates in those conditions where Sorbates are equally effective.(i) Emulsified sauces with a fat content of less than 60 % fat. At present, 2 000 mg/kg of Sa is permitted. Given 2.3.1 above, the present 2 000 mg/kg Sa on its own therefore should continue as a permitted alternative to 1 500 Sa+Ba.(ii) Edible Collagen casing. Sa should be permitted q.s.Such casing is very perishable and only consumed in very small quantities.3.1.4. Section 13On sulphites the recent SCF report states that these 'do not pose a health hazard to the great majority of people` but do so to those suffering from asthma. This contraindication should therefore be clearly mentioned on the label.(i) Those sugars which are defined by Directive 73/437/EEC can contain 15 mg/kg of SO2. These can now be produced at 10 mg/kg. In its opinion on the revision of this Directive (), the Committee noted the fact and asked for the permitted level to be reduced to 10 mg/kg for these sugars as soon as possible.(ii) For dehydrated apples and pears the words 'not sold to the end consumer` should be deleted and the maximum SO2 should be changed to read:'with more than 12 % moisture: 1 500 mg/kgwith less than 12 % moisture: 600 mg/kg`Products with over 12 % moisture are more pleasant to eat and there is an appreciable demand for these in some Member States. Such fruit has been on sale to the consumer for many years as an alternative snack to confectionery.3.1.5. Section 18The Committee approves the improved layout of this table.3.1.5.1. The following should be added:(i) Cooled raised bread dough: 3 g/kg (E 339, 341 and E 450i)In many countries production of bread from frozen or cooled dough is increasingly needed, partly because night work is being limited for social reasons. Phosphates help to counteract the deterioration in dough properties resulting from cooling/freezing and subsequent thawing.(ii) Also add the word in italics:'Chocolate, malt and other flavoured dairy based drinks`In some Member States vanilla and fruit flavoured dairy based drinks are also popular and help to raise milk consumption. E 339 helps to avoid coagulation of milk protein during sterilisation.There are of course no health reasons against these uses.(iii) The category 'Tea and herbal infusions` should be replaced by 'Instant teas, instant herbal infusions and powder mixes based on them`.Phosphates in fact are only used and needed in the instant products, not teas and infusions as such.3.1.6. Section 22The last entry (which relates to talc) should be altered to delete 'surface treatment only`. If this is not accepted, then this should be changed to read:'Confectionary and confectionary components (surface treatment only): quantum satis.`Talc is used to stop confectionary items sticking together. When producing (say) a panned item with a caramel centre, the centres need anti-stick surface treatment during panning as does the whole item after the outer layer has been applied.For control purposes the first solution is preferred.3.1.7. Other items to be added to the AnnexAdd to Annex IV of Directive 95/2/EC:3.1.7.1. 'E 297, Fumaric acid:Muffins: 2,5 g/kg`This aids in producing the porous texture needed for muffins. Fumaric acid occurs in all animals including the human body. The SCF gave an ADI of 6 mg/kg body weight. 2,5 g fumaric acid per kg of muffins has been calculated to give an intake of 0,0041 mg/kg body weight.3.1.7.2. E 363 (Succinic acid) Transfer to Annex I or:'Moulded jelly sweets: 10 g/kg (for surface treatment only)`As this has an unlimited ADI, there seems no good reason for keeping it out of Annex I. However, if this is not accepted, then the use in jelly sweets should be in Annex IV.This gives a pleasant acid taste and unlike other fruit acids is not hygroscopic, thus giving a better shelf life to the product. Until now this has been permitted q.s. in several Member States.3.1.7.3. 'E 234 NISINLiquid egg: 6,25 mg/kg`Liquid egg deteriorates very fast and needs a preservative in addition to heat treatment, since the use of heat has to be limited to avoid coagulation. Nisin (unlike Sorbates) is a preservative active in neutral conditions and has been found to be ideal for this.Nisin is made by lactococcus in milk and is also present in cheese. It is broken down by the human digestive system.Brussels, 18 December 1996.The President of the Economic and Social CommitteeTom JENKINS() OJ No C 206, 13. 8. 1992, p. 15.() Up to 4 years in some cases.() CES 1259/96 (96/0112 COD - 96/0113 - 96/0118 CNS), 31. 10. 1996.