WRITTEN QUESTION E-1955/03 by Baroness Sarah Ludford (ELDR) to the Commission. Processing of chicken intended for human consumption.
Date: 2003-06-13
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: agro-industry, animal protein, consumer information, food safety, foodstuffs legislation, labelling, poultrymeat, traceability

C 78 E/56

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

27.3.2004

(2004/C 78 E/0054)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1927/03

by Jules Maaten (ELDR) to the Commission

(13 June 2003)

Subject: Bovine and porcine protein in chicken

1.
Is the Commission aware of the BBC’s Panorama programme of 22 May 2003 which reported that
Dutch chicken contained protein from beef and pork, although this was not indicated on the label? It was
also claimed that Dutch companies were using proteins which could no longer be traced by such bodies as
the Food and Veterinary Office.

2.

3.

Is the Commission aware of these practices?

Are such practices acceptable and safe for consumers?

(2004/C 78 E/0055)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1955/03

by Baroness Sarah Ludford (ELDR) to the Commission

Subject: Processing of chicken intended for human consumption

(13 June 2003)

The BBC TV programme ‘Panorama’
in the UK recently highlighted a common practice in the food
industry of using protein derived from pork and beef as an additive to chicken fillets in order to increase
the amount of water that the meat can hold and, hence, the weight.

Much of this product is supplied to the catering industry, so there is little or no information available to
consumers. Will the Commission undertake to ban this practice, which amounts to consumer fraud and an
infringement of consumers’ right to choose what they eat?

Joint answer
to Written Questions E-1927/03 and E-1955/03
given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(28 July 2003)

The Commission is aware of the programme made by the BBC and broadcast on 22 May 2003, and of the
results of the tests carried out by the UK and Irish authorities and published on 12 March 2003 (1) relating
to chicken-fillet-based products made in the Netherlands and intended for catering outlets.

The practices investigated are intended to increase the amount of water in the end product by adding
water-retaining ingredients such as salts, polyphosphates and proteins (caseins, protein hydrolysates).

As the Commission stated in its answers to Written Questions E-2418/02 from Ms Jackson (2) and E-2331/
02 from Ms Corby (3) on the same subject, it is not illegal to process meat in this way, as long as hygiene
and food safety rules are respected and the buyer is clearly informed of the real nature of the product.
With regard to the latter point, the Commission has proposed, in the context of the work of its Standing
Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health, a new measure making it obligatory to mention the
presence of added water in a product’s trade name.

With regard to the difficulty of ensuring the traceability of the proteins used, according to the BBC
programme it was impossible to detect the DNA of the proteins used and therefore to identify the species
of animal from which they were derived. The Commission will be looking at the procedure with experts
from the Member States.

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/57

it should be emphasised at

in itself, constitute
However,
traceability, but rather an a posteriori traceability tool. Other measures, in particular documentary checks,
are needed in order to trace back a product.

this stage that DNA detection does not,

With regard to the labelling of these meat products, current EU legislation (4) requires the use of a trade
name and list of ingredients that do not mislead the buyer and requires the amount of the characteristic
ingredient of the food (in this case meat) to be stated.

This legislation applies to foods intended to be supplied as they are to the end consumer, i.e. foods sold
packaged or not, self-service or take-away. Dishes served in restaurants are not covered, although, as the
legislation also applies to foodstuffs supplied to restaurants, the latter should be able to provide any
information requested on the ingredients and characteristics of these products.

(1) http://www.foodstandards.gov.uk/news/pressreleases/chickenwater0303

http://www.fsai.ie/press_releases/120303.htm.

(2) OJ C 28 E, 6.2.2003, p. 234.
(3) OJ C 52 E, 6.3.2003, p. 152.
(4) Directive 2000/13/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 March 2000 on the approximation of
the laws of the Member States relating to the labelling, presentation and advertising of foodstuffs, OJ L 109,
6.5.2000.

(2004/C 78 E/0056)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1937/03

by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(13 June 2003)

Subject: Corinth-Patras railway link

Various local organisations have complained that no account has been taken of the special regional
planning study on the Gulf of Corinth funded by the EU’s Envireg programme in the construction of the
new rail
link between Corinth and Patras. Furthermore, the method generally adopted in such cases,
namely the construction of tunnels and viaducts at a distance from the coast and built-up areas, has been
completely ignored. Given that the construction of railways is a project of key importance for the region
as a whole, would the Commission examine whether this project is being carried out in the most
appropriate manner, so as to cause least damage to the environment?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(29 July 2003)

The responsibility for the design and implementation of major infrastructure projects, such as the
construction of a new railway,
lies with the authorities in the Member State in accordance with the
principles of decentralised management that apply to the Structural Funds. It is for these authorities to
determine an appropriate balance between economic, societal and environmental considerations, and to
ensure respect for regulatory requirements.

As concerns the railway Korinthos-Patras, the application submitted by the Greek authorities for European
co-funding met all the required conditions, including those relating to environmental terms and conditions.

The study to which the Honourable Member refers dates back to the early nineties. It did not give rise to a
legally binding spatial planning framework for the area covered by it, nor did it concern specifically the
track design of the railway.