WRITTEN QUESTION E-3176/03 by Dorette Corbey (PSE) to the Commission. Food safety and developing countries.
Date: 2003-10-27
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: developing countries, food safety, foodstuffs legislation, health legislation, import (EU), third country

20.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 70 E/231

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(8 December 2003)

In the Commission proposal for the Parliament and the Council Regulation establishing a European Centre
for Disease Prevention and Control one of the tasks of the Centre would be to support the networking
activities and dedicated surveillance networks of authorities and structures designated under Decision
No 2119/98/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 24 September 1998 setting up a network for the
epidemiological surveillance and control of communicable diseases in the Community (1) and ensure their
integrated operation through the provision of technical and scientific expertise to the Commission and the
Member States. These activities would be financed from the budget of the Centre. However, it is foreseen
that during the first years of the operation of the Centre its activities will be partly financed from the
Public Health Programme (2005 and 2006, EUR 4,9 million and EUR 6 million respectively).

Activities on surveillance form a significant part of the Public Health Programme established under
Decision No 1786/2002/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 23 September 2002 (2). In line with
the priorities of the 2003 work plan (3) for the implementation of this programme, which received a
unanimous positive opinion by the Programme Committee, the Commission has proposed the funding of a
number of projects,
including several projects on surveillance networks. Not all of the applications
submitted can be funded, however, given the budgetary constraints. The Commission proposals for
funding of selected projects received a unanimous positive opinion by the Programme Committee.
However the final steps of the selection procedure are currently taking place.

The Commission will continue to support communicable disease surveillance activities in the most
effective and efficient way possible under the financial envelopes set by the Parliament and the Council.
Its proposal for a European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control has to be seen in this context and
reflects the priority that the Commission accords to the strengthening of the capacities of the Community
in this area.

(1) OJ L 268, 3.10.1998.
(2) OJ L 271, 9.10.2002.
(3) OJ C 62, 15.3.2003.

(2004/C 70 E/248)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3176/03

by Dorette Corbey (PSE) to the Commission

(27 October 2003)

Subject: Food safety and developing countries

The European Union has made significant efforts in the area of food safety in recent years. Following the
adoption of general legislation on food, further implementing measures have been on the agenda, such as
the package of directives on hygiene and controls (1).

1. What consequences has the greater concentration on food safety within the EU had, or what
consequences will it have, for developing countries?

2. Which countries have seen their food exports to the EU decline?

Does the Commission anticipate, as a consequence of the legislation on hygiene and controls (1)
3.
a reduction, or an increase, in food exports to the EU from African, Asian and Latin American countries?
Which countries will be particularly affected?

(1) COM(2000) 438 final and COM(2003) 52 final.

C 70 E/232

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

20.3.2004

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(5 December 2003)

With the package of new legislation concerning food safety, the requirements and related controls become
more complete. The Commission has built in some flexibility by introducing the principle of equivalence
in the control proposal and HACCP in the hygiene proposals. Indeed, the approach has totally changed
with the introduction of the integrated chain approach from primary production until sale to the
consumer, with responsibility being given to the producer, with the introduction of a systematic science
based risk analysis and the precautionary principle, with the requirement of full traceability, with the
introduction of modern meat inspection techniques and the application of HACCP. The Commission has
closely ensured that the proposals complied with the provisions of the SPS Agreement of the World Trade
Organisation. Furthermore, it must be pointed out that the newly introduced principles are in compliance
with Codex Alimentarius. Nevertheless, Member States and exporting third countries have to adapt to the
new situation. By the introduction of new legislation, the working methods of producers and controlling
authorities and production and trade structures have to be adapted. As regards developing countries, the
Commission introduced certain provisions in its control proposal. These provisions are aimed at
strengthening, by technical assistance, the capacity of developing countries to implement the EU import
requirements, particularly for drafting the yearly control plans.

At this moment it is not possible to make a statement on the possible influence of the new legislation on
the existing exports to the U as the new legislation is only partially in force. The import requirements of
laying down the
the Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2002,
general principles and requirements of food law, establishing the European Food Safety Authority and
laying down procedures in matters of food safety (General Food Law) only come into effect on 1 January
2005. The hygiene package on the control proposal still has to be adopted.

(2004/C 70 E/249)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3177/03

by Dorette Corbey (PSE) to the Commission

(27 October 2003)

Subject: Reuse of medical instruments and accessories

Medical instruments and accessories account for a significant proportion of the costs of public healthcare.
Reuse of such instruments and accessories can reduce costs by up to 40 % and has significant benefits from
an environmental point of view. However, producers of medical instruments and accessories often mark
their products as ‘single use’, preventing reuse and unnecessarily driving up costs. A further negative
consequence of this approach is that (cid:1) in order to save costs (cid:1) instruments and accessories are often
nonetheless reused, without being treated, cleaned or sterilised in a professional manner. A large
proportion of hospital infections are believed to be the result of unprofessional reuse of accessories and
instruments.

Is the Commission aware of the existence of agreements between producers of medical accessories

1.
and instruments with a view to marking as many products as possible ‘single use’?

2.

Is the Commission prepared to carry out an investigation into such agreements?

Could the Commission give an indication of the benefits of professional reuse in terms of economic

3.
costs, environmental benefits and prevention of hospital infections?

Is the Commission prepared (possibly within the framework of the thematic strategy for recycling) to

4.
promote the reuse of medical instruments and accessories?