WRITTEN QUESTION E-1159/00 by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. White Paper on Food Safety and the European Food Authority.
Date: 2000-04-11
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: extra-EU trade, food safety, foodstuff, labelling

C 72 E/20

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

6.3.2001

Member States are responsible for the day-to-day enforcement of Community legislation. Commission
experts, however, carry out periodic on-the-spot checks to ensure uniform application of the Directive and
that the authorities of the Member States are monitoring compliance with the requirements of this
Directive.

The approval of improper route plans by the authorities and the use of vehicles which fail to comply with
Council Regulation (EC) No 411/98 of 16 February 1998 on additional animal protection standards
applicable to road vehicles used for the carriage of livestock on journeys exceeding eight hours (3) are
infringements which have been reported by inspection missions of the food and veterinary office (FVO) of
the Commission. Infringement proceedings in relation to the protection of animals during transport have
been opened against Greece and others are being prepared in relation to some other Member States.

In the meantime, the Commission has recently taken several additional steps to improve various aspects of
the protection of animals during transport.

Article 13 of Council Directive 91/628/EEC as amended by Council Directive 95/29/EC provides for the
Commission to submit a report to the Council on the experience acquired by the Member States since the
implementation of the Directive, possibly accompanied by proposals. The report will be presented to the
Council before June 2000 taking into account all available information and in particular the findings of the
FVO missions which the Honourable Member mentioned. The Commission will put forward proposals to
amend current legislation to ensure better enforcement in the light of the conclusions of the above-
mentioned report.

(1) OJ L 340, 11.12.1991.
(2) OJ L 148, 30.6.1995.
(3) OJ L 52, 21.2.1998.

(2001/C 72 E/023)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1159/00

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(11 April 2000)

Subject: White Paper on Food Safety and the European Food Authority

The White Paper on Food Safety (COM(1999) 719 final) was published in January 2000. Chapter 4 is
concerned with establishing a European Food Authority (EFA). Chapter 5 considers legislation on food
safety.

Labelling has become a trade policy issue in many different fields including food safety. The Commission is
seeking multilateral guidelines on labelling (section 99). It makes sense to use the same labelling rules for
imported products as for products produced in the EU.

Will the Commission seek to ensure that multilateral labelling guidelines are at least equivalent to EU
rules? If so, has any action already been taken on these lines in an international context? If not, why is the
labelling guidelines of equivalent value and what alternatives are
Commission opposed to multilateral
available to the Commission for applying the same labelling rules to imported food as to food produced in
the EU?

Answer given by Mr Lamy on behalf of the Commission

(16 June 2000)

The policy of the Commission is that compulsory labelling should be applied equally to both Community
products and imports from third countries. Current Community legislation on food labelling already sets
general and specific rules applicable to both Community and imported products. To date,
these
requirements have not been challenged. Nevertheless, there are important factors which should be taken
into account in the context of international trade.

6.3.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 72 E/21

Labelling is a broad term which may have several objectives. These include consumer information about
contents, methods of production and ingredients, and warnings about certain potential health risks (eg
possible presence of allergens). Labelling is covered by the World Trade Organization (WTO) sanitary and
phytosanitary agreement where it is related directly to food safety. Otherwise it is covered by the WTO
agreement on technical barriers to trade (TBT), or even by the General agreement on tariffs and trade
(GATT). The TBT agreement seeks to ensure that technical measures do not impede international trade.
Trade-restrictive measures are allowed only if they are aiming at some legitimate objective. Consumer
information is not explicitly mentioned in the TBT list so far, but health concerns and prevention of
deceptive practices are explicitly mentioned. This does not mean that consumer information could not be
considered as a legitimate objective under the TBT agreement because firstly the agreement authorizes
labelling when it is used to prevent deceptive practices, and, secondly, because this list of legitimate
objectives is not exhaustive.

The Commission wishes to see multilateral discussions with view to obtaining international agreement on
these issues. The Codex Alimentarius has established general and specific standards for some categories of
products. The Commission takes part in the Codex meetings and, together with the Member States, will
continue to use its best endeavours to obtain agreement which meets the Community objectives with
respect to the protection of human health and consumer information.

(2001/C 72 E/024)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1169/00

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(10 April 2000)

Subject: Modified cotton seeds

The importation and cultivation of genetically modified seeds is prohibited in the European Union
pursuant to Community Directives 90/220 (1) and 98/95 (2). Traditional varieties of cotton seed which
also contain modified seeds have reportedly been imported into Greece. According to information from
the Association of Official Seed Certifying Agencies (AOSCA), the competent international body for the
certification of seeds, the USA does not certify that the seeds imported from that country are free of
genetically modified material.

Given that European legislation prohibits the marketing and use of modified seed, will the Commission
say:

1. whether it proposes to ban imports into the EU from the USA and other countries of cotton seeds and
other plant seeds for which there is no official certification that they do not contain genetically
modified material, and

2. whether the Member States can unilaterally ban imports of seeds pursuant to current Community

legislation?

(1) OJ L 117, 8.5.1990, p. 15.
(2) OJ L 25, 1.2.1999, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(15 June 2000)

1.
No genetically modified cotton varieties have as yet received authorisation for the placing on the
market in the Community under Part C of Council Directive 90/220/EEC of 23 April 1990 on the
deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified organisms. Two applications, concerning
the placing on the market of insect-resistant and herbicide-tolerant cotton, are currently pending approval
in the authorisation procedure under the Directive.