WRITTEN QUESTION E-2702/02 by Paulo Casaca (PSE) to the Commission. Food falsification in the European Union.
Date: 2002-09-26
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU control, consumer protection, fats, foodstuff, foodstuffs legislation, fraud, fraud against the EU, milk product, olive oil, product quality

C 110 E/92

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

8.5.2003

(2003/C 110 E/093)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2702/02

by Paulo Casaca (PSE) to the Commission

(26 September 2002)

Subject: Food falsification in the European Union

fraud and food adulteration in my parliamentary questions
I have already tackled the problem of
Nos E-1227/01 (1), E-1248/01 (2), E-2106/01, E-2107/01 (3), E-0027/01 (4), E-1001/01 (5), E-1000/01 (6),
E-0999/01 (7), E-0998/01 (8) and E-3286/01 (9) and in the 2000 budgetary discharge procedure. The replies
received from the Commission led me to conclude that the issue is not given due importance.

Meanwhile, according to the European Voice of August 2002, the number of adulterated food products
confiscated by the customs authorities of the Member States rose from 2340 in 2000 to 4106 in 2001,
and Commission administrators have apparently claimed that organised crime now focuses more on food
adulteration and automobile parts than on luxury articles.

May I therefore conclude that the Commission has changed its attitude to this issue since its reply to
Question E-1227/01, stating that ‘the Commission does not share the Honourable Member’s view that
there is an urgent need to take further measures … to prevent fraud and product adulteration’?

(1) OJ C 40 E, 14.2.2002, p. 27.
(2) OJ C 364 E, 20.12.2001, p. 67.
(3) OJ C 40 E, 14.2.2002, p. 187.
(4) OJ C 187 E, 3.7.2001, p. 162.
(5) OJ C 350 E, 11.12.2001, p. 67.
(6) OJ C 350 E, 11.12.2001, p. 66.
(7) OJ C 40 E, 14.2.2002, p. 18.
(8) OJ C 364 E, 20.12.2001, p. 30.
(9) OJ C 147 E, 20.6.2002, p. 143.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(12 November 2002)

The Commission is mindful of the importance of the problems highlighted by the Honourable Member,
and relies on the existing architecture of protective measures, which have proven their capacity to lead to
effective controls in cooperation with the Member States.

in accordance with its policy of consumer protection and zero tolerance with
This notwithstanding,
respect to fraud, the Commission intends to continue to enhance the system and adapt it to the changing
circumstances.

In this perspective, the Commission would emphasize that:

(cid:1) Its strategy for the fraud-proofing of legislation (action 94 of the White Paper on Reform) will lead to
the

in the protection of

the financial

interests of

continued and generalised improvement
Communities, in particular as regards high-risk sectors.

(cid:1) As regards adulteration of agricultural products, the Commission has recently introduced a number of
measures: The Commission has been following up for a long time the problems of fraud in the sector
of the olive oil, both with regard to the right to obtain aid and to the quality of the products launched
on the market. In this last respect, it adopted Regulation (EEC) No 2568/91 of 11 July 1991 which
specifies the characteristics of the olive oils, in particular in order to avoid the fraudulent mixtures,
and the detail of the analysis methods to be used (1). Lately, within the framework of the strategy for
the quality of the olive oil of which it made one of priorities for the sector, the Commission adopted
Regulation (EC) No 1019/2002 of 13 June 2002 which institutes additional rules for the control of
the olive oil of the marketed products (2).

8.5.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 110 E/93

(cid:1) Regarding checks on composition, the Community provisions concerning official tests relating to the
detection of foreign fats in milkfat appear in the annex to Commission Regulation (EC) No 454/95 (3)
and have since been inserted in Annex XXV to Commission Regulation (EC) No 213/2001 laying
down detailed rules for the application of Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999 as regards methods for the
analysis and quality evaluation of milk and milk products (4).

(cid:1) The new legislative framework established by the ‘General Food Law’ adopted on 21 January 2002
reinforces the Commission’s capability to act on microbiological and chemical contamination on food
products of any origin. Under these provisions, the Commission can adopt emergency measures
covering the whole food chain ‘where it is evident that food or feed originating in the Community or
imported from a third country is likely to constitute a serious risk to human health and that such risk
cannot be contained satisfactorily by means of measures taken by the Member State(s) concerned’
(Article 53 of Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2002
laying down the general principles and requirements of food law, establishing the European Food
Safety Authority and laying down procedures in matters of food safety (5)). In addition, this legislative
framework insists on the importance of the traceability of food products in order to target the
appropriate part of the food chain.

(1) OJ L 248, 5.9.1991.
(2) OJ L 155, 14.6.2002.
(3) Commission Regulation (EC) No 454/95 of 28 February 1995 laying down detailed rules for intervention on the

market in butter and cream, OJ L 46, 1.3.1995.

(4) OJ L 37, 7.2.2001.
(5) OJ L 31, 1.2.2002.

(2003/C 110 E/094)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2709/02

by Rosa Miguélez Ramos (PSE) to the Commission

(26 September 2002)

Subject: Fisheries research in the Six Framework Research Programme

I am surprised that in its ‘Guide’ to the reform of the common fisheries policy the Commission claims that
both the Commission and Sixth Framework Programme provide ongoing support for fisheries research.

Is there any specific heading or chapter dedicated to fisheries or maritime research? Do these subjects
appear amongst the seven priorities of the Framework programme?

How does the Commission view the massive budgetary cut (by two thirds) in CFP support research as
against the Fifth Framework Programme? How does it justify this cutback? Does this not in fact contradict
the Commission’s claims about ongoing support for fisheries research?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(25 October 2002)

Under the Sixth Framework Programme (FP), research in fisheries and aquaculture are covered by Thematic
Priority 5 ‘Food quality and safety’, Priority 6 ‘Global change and ecosystems’, and in particular Priority 8,
‘Scientific support to policy’, where a budget has been identified and earmarked. Under priorities 5 and 6,
issues such as overfishing and overexploitation of marine resources can be taken into consideration under
an ecosystem approach, as well as issues related to the quality and safety of seafood either caught or
farmed. Furthermore, individual objectives of policy-oriented research under Priority 8 are being defined to
be very specific and will allow the support to the Community Framework Programme (CFP) to cover a
very wide spectrum of issues as effectively as in FP5. In this context,
it is, nevertheless, worthwhile
mentioning that
the available budgets under priority 8 were substantively reduced from the initial
Commission’s proposal.