WRITTEN QUESTION E-2572/02 by Kathleen Van Brempt (PSE) to the Commission. Cyclamate in light soft drinks.
Date: 2002-09-16
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: consumer information, food standard, foodstuffs legislation, health risk, labelling, non-alcoholic beverage, sweetener

C 52 E/186

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

6.3.2003

The Commission is aware that chemical substances, when bonded within polymers, may change their
properties significantly. However, also those properties should also be known to ensure a safe use. The
Commission will therefore develop an appropriate and proportionate scheme that provides the necessary
information.

In conclusion, the Commission is seeking to balance animal welfare considerations against the potentially
serious threats to human health and the environment presented by chemicals when their properties and
uses are not sufficiently known.

(1) COM(2001) 88final, available on the Internet http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/chemicals/0188_en.pdf.

(2003/C 52 E/205)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2572/02

by Kathleen Van Brempt (PSE) to the Commission

(16 September 2002)

Subject: Cyclamate in ‘light’ soft drinks

The Voedingscentrum (Nutrition Centre) in the Netherlands recently gave a warning about the use of
cyclamate in ‘light’ drinks. A written question on this subject (E-0051/02 (1)) has been posed by Alexander
de Roo (Verts/ALE). In its reply of 22 February 2002, the Commission stated that it did not intend to
introduce a ban on cyclamate. It also said that it did not regard additional
labelling requirements as
justified.

If the Commission takes the view that additional warnings on labels are unnecessary, how does it intend to
warn the public against excessive consumption of cyclamate?

The Commission is looking at how to ensure that intake of cyclamate does not exceed the new ADI, for
example by amending authorised limits for its use and authorising alternatives. Could it give further
details?

What is the Commission’s objective in amending authorised limits for the use of cyclamate?

What are the alternatives to cyclamate to which the Commission refers in its answer to written question E-
0051/02? How does it intend to promote their use?

(1) OJ C 147 E, 20.6.2002, p. 236.

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(16 October 2002)

As indicated in its reply to Written Question E-0051/02 by Mr De Roo, the Commission has examined
how to ensure that the intake of cyclamate does not exceed the new Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) for this
substance, for example by amendments to authorised limits for its use and the authorisation of alternatives.

Consequently, the Commission adopted on 11 July 2002 a proposal for the amendment of Parliament and
Council Directive 94/35/EC on sweeteners for use in foodstuffs (1). This proposal foresees to lower the
amount of cyclamate that may be used in light soft drinks. Furthermore, it is proposed to ban the use of
cyclamate in confectionery, chewing gum and ice cream with no added sugar.

As an alternative to cyclamate, all other authorised sweeteners may be used. With the proposed
amendment of the above-mentioned Directive, sucralose, a new sweetener, is proposed for authorisation
and could therefore become available as an additional alternative. The Parliament and the Council are
currently examining the proposal.

6.3.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 52 E/187

If these measures are adopted, the Commission would expect that the intake of cyclamate by consumers
will stay below the new ADI. In any event, by virtue of the above-mentioned Directive, the Member States
must monitor the intake of sweeteners, and intake levels above the ADI would be detected.

(1) COM(2002) 375 final.

(2003/C 52 E/206)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2584/02

by Olivier Dupuis (NI) to the Commission

(10 September 2002)

Subject: Human rights in Laos

On 26 October next it will be three years since Thongpaseuth Keuakoun, Khamphouvieng SISA-AT, Seng-
Aloune Phengphanh, Bouavanh Chanmanivong and Keochay, Lao student
leaders, disappeared after
organising a peaceful march in Vientiane calling for more social justice, free elections and democratic
including two EP resolutions in February and
reforms in Laos. Despite various international moves,
November 2001, the attitude of the highest authorities in Vientiane has fluctuated between silence and
contradictory information. In November 2001 the Lao Deputy Foreign Minister, Phongsavat Boupha, told
Mrs Boniver, the Italian Deputy Foreign Minister, that the five had not yet been tried but soon would be.
On 13 June 2002, when questioned by the EP Delegation for ASEAN at a meeting in Strasbourg,
Mr Samane Souvannasao, vice-chairman of the Legal Affairs Committee of the National Assembly of the
LPDR, claimed, without any supporting evidence, and total contradicting the statements previously made
by the Deputy Foreign Minister, that the five had been sentenced as ‘common criminals’ on 29 June 2001
and been imprisoned in Vientiane. Furthermore, in reply to a request from the Liberal Christopher Huhne,
who asked to see all the trial documentation, the Lao MP said that it would be forwarded to him, which
suggested that the documents might not have been drawn up yet … The numerous contradictions and the
great confusion surrounding the official version of events make one fear the worst as far as the five student
leaders are concerned. Can the Commission urge the authorities of the LPDR to supply, without further
delay, detailed, precise and exhaustive information regarding the present whereabouts of
the five
‘desaparecidos’, covering both the legal issues (cid:1) including the proceeedings of their trial, if any (cid:1) and
their imprisonment and state of health? Does the Commission not consider that to turn citizens into
‘desaparecidos’ or ‘non-persons’ is one of the most serious violations of the fundamental rights recognised
by the UN Charter and the international conventions to which the LPDR itself has freely subscribed? If so,
will the Commission give the Lao authorities to understand that to continue such practices and other
abuses contrary to fundamental rights will lay them open to a suspension of the Cooperation Agreement?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(1 October 2002)

The Commission has expressed on several occasions, both to the Lao Government and in the Parliament,
its deep concern regarding the human rights situation in Lao People’s Democratic Republic (PDR).

The question of the arrest and disappearance of the five leaders of the ‘26 October 1999 Movement’ has
been raised by the Commission in bilateral meetings with the Lao Government, as well as in other fora.
Unfortunately, it has been impossible so far to receive clear information from the Government on the five
missing Laotians.

the United Nations (UN) Charter and the
The Commission fully supports the implementation of
international conventions as referred to by the Honourable Member.
It welcomes the efforts of the
Parliament Delegation for Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) Affairs to try to get
information and documentation regarding the Lao student leaders and will support these efforts.