Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the "Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on official feed and food controls"
Date: 2003-10-09
Institutions: European Committee of the Regions
Subjects: European Committee of the Regions, animal nutrition, food inspection, food safety, foodstuff, opinion

C 23/14

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

27.1.2004

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the ‘Proposal for a Regulation of the European
Parliament and of the Council on official feed and food controls’

(2004/C 23/03)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS,

having regard to the Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on official
feed and food controls (COM(2003) 52 final — 2003/0030 (COD));

having regard to the decision of the Council of 28 February 2003 to consult it on this subject, under
Article 152(4) of the Treaty establishing the European Community;

having regard to the decision of its Bureau of 14 May 2002 to instruct its Commission for Sustainable
Development to draw up an opinion on this subject;

having regard to its opinion on the Communication from the Commission entitled ‘White Paper on Food
Safety’ (CdR 77/2000 fin) (1);

having regard to its draft opinion (CdR 67/2003 rev. 2) adopted on 12 June 2003 by its Commission for
Sustainable Development (rapporteur: Mr Xavier Desgain, Member of the Walloon Parliament -B);

whereas a foodstuffs policy based on a high level of protection for the environment and consumer health
is important for the members of the CoR,

adopted the following opinion unanimously at its 51st plenary session on 9 October 2003.

1. Views and recommendations of the Committee of the

Regions

The Committee of the Regions

1.1.
observes that the aims of the draft regulation tally with
the concerns expressed by the Committee of the Regions in its
opinion of 12 April 2000 on the White Paper on food safety
(CdR 77/2000 fin), but many of these concerns remain;

1.2.
recognises that the fundamental principles of food
safety and public confidence must be based upon a comprehen-
sive and integrated approach, encompassing the whole food
chain ‘from farm to fork’:

— transparency of all actions and opinions;

— maximum information in clear and understandable form
being provided to allow effective consumer choice;

— effective traceability of all food, ingredients and feeding-
stuffs through the food chain to the consumer, ensuring
at every stage of the process the ability to identify all
ingredients;

— application of the precautionary principle in appropriate

circumstances;

1.3.
welcomes the Commission’s initiative to bring the
controls needed for both foodstuffs and animal feed into a
joint regulation;

would also like this all-encompassing piece of legis-
1.4.
lation to apply, with respect to the objectives of the draft
regulation, to the official controls performed for the verifi-
cation of compliance with the rules governing the common
market organisations for agricultural products (arable crops,
wine, olive oil, fruit and vegetables, hops, milk and dairy
products, beef and veal, sheep and goat meat and honey) such
that agricultural production as a whole is covered by the
across-the-board provisions of the regulation;

believes that in any event Directive 2000/29/EC (2) on
1.5.
protective measures against the introduction of organisms
harmful to plants or plant products and against their spread
within the Community will need to be adapted;

1.6.
supports the introduction of multi-annual national
control plans. Nonetheless, in its opinion on the White Paper
on food safety, the CoR recognises the need to acknowledge
and respect the diversity and cultural and economic signifi-
cance of regional and local traditions and customs with respect
to food production and taste and therefore of always seeking
the appropriate balance between consumer safety and con-
sumer choice. It also believes that the promotion and support
of typical food products from different local traditions rep-
resents a very decisive way to give consumers healthy foods,
and at the same time to help the economies of many rural
areas. These concerns are still relevant and will need to be
incorporated into the multi-annual national control plans
(Article 42 of the proposal for a regulation). It does indeed
make sense for the control tasks contained in these plans to

(1) OJ C 226, 8.8.2000, p. 7.

(2) OJ L 169, 10.7.2000, p. 1.

27.1.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 23/15

focus on the highest-risk sectors, and that as such a link should
be established to waste management procedures, large-scale
processing and production, the nature of the products and the
production methods used. In this respect, care must be taken
with the wording of Article 43 of the draft regulation. Recital
No 13 to the regulation stipulates that the frequency of official
controls should be regular and proportionate to the risk.
This risk should be assessed in relation to the production,
processing and distribution methods used and the production
volume. For the above reasons and in order to secure the best
possible management of the multi-annual control plans, it is
essential that the Member States should involve the regional
and local authorities from the initial planning stage. The
same applies to preparation of the contingency plans under
Article 13;

1.7.
would advocate assessing the risks in relation to each
production procedure. Controls should be conducted at as
early a stage as possible with particular emphasis placed on
large-scale industrial procedures and the cold chain;

considers that the majority of food crises that have
1.8.
taken place over recent years have involved the animal feed
sector, and calls for stricter and more frequent controls in this
sector, and for these controls to be geared more towards risk
prevention;

1.9.
calls for the regulation to be flexible enough to take
account of the specific characteristics of those areas governed
by the following regulations: Council Regulations (EEC)
No 2092/91 of 24 June 1991 on organic production of
agricultural products and indications referring thereto on
agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), (EEC) No 2081/92
of 14 July 1992 on the protection of geographical
indications and designations of origin for agricultural
products and foodstuffs (2), and (EEC) No 2082/92 of 14 July

(1) OJ L 198, 22.7.1991, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by
Commission Regulation (EC) No 436/2001 (OJ L 63, 3.3.2001,
p. 16).

(2) OJ L 208, 24.7.1992, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by
Commission Regulation (EC) No 2796/2000 (OJ L 324,
21.12.2000, p. 26).

Brussels, 9 October 2003.

1992 (3) on certificates of specific character for agricultural
products and foodstuffs;

1.10.
would like the multi-annual national control plans to
take real account of the need for traceability throughout and
ensure the transparency of these procedures;

1.11.
welcomes the introduction of Community controls
in the Member States via general audits, which will enable the
Member States to improve their control procedures;

1.12.
endorses the obligation placed on the Member States,
under the powers enshrined in the EC Treaty, to provide for
penalties for serious infringements that could lead to the entry
onto the market of unsafe products within the meaning of
Articles 14 and 15 of EC Regulation No 178/2002 (4) (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) as, in a great many
cases, only penalties have a truly deterrent effect.
It will
nonetheless also be necessary to provide for administrative
penalties, which can be more rapidly implemented for specific
infringements. However, the CoR would prefer to see harmon-
ised EU sanctions enforced by the European Commission in
the future. The CoR is aware of the fact that the introduction
of such EU-wide sanctions would most probably render a
revision of the treaty necessary;

calls on the Commission,

1.13.
in order not to create
distortion of competition, to introduce a system with harmon-
ised levels of fees to be imposed on feed and food business
operators in cases of non-compliance with feed and food
law, which leads to control activities exceeding the normal
monitoring activity. In addition, requests that the control fee
system should be flexible enough to take account of the
interests of small enterprises;

1.14.
would like these various remarks to be included in
the training sessions run by the commission for the staff
responsible for the controls.

(3) OJ L 208, 24.7.1992, p. 9 Regulation as last amended by the Act

of accession of Austria, Finland and Sweden.

(4) OJ L 31, 1.2.2002, p. 1.

The President

of the Committee of the Regions

Albert BORE