|
Петък, 28 Ноември 2008 00:00 |
|
Ladies and gentlemen,
As this session comes to a conclusion, I’d like to share with you some thoughts arising by my experience, my every day reality and most important, my knowledge of EU legislation environment.
But first let’s consider some key motives in the Agro-Food Sector:
Our major aims are (or at least should be):
• Producing more to meet the growing demand for food around the globe is one need – and these days perhaps it's the one which is uppermost in our minds.
• Ensuring food security on our continent is another - which in my view is best achieved, not only by producing more, but also by trading more.
• Finally, agriculture is also at the centre of the debate when it comes to climate change and sustainable development. I firmly believe that European agriculture and our Common Agricultural Policy are part of the solution – not part of the problem.
At this juncture, it is crucial to not lose direction. Many are confused, both about the origins of the food price increases and in particular about the policy response. We have to keep the compass steady and build on the reforms already undertaken.
We need the same things.
All our farmers need a system of market tools which does not hold them back from responding energetically to demand, but which gives them a safety net for times of real crisis.
All our farmers need a Single Payment Scheme (or, for the time being, a Single Area Payment Scheme) which works as simply as possible.
And all our farmers need support to face developing challenges such as the need to fight climate change, manage water better and make the most of bioenergy.
In March 2000, in Lisbon, the European Union heads of states and governments
agreed to make the EU “the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-driven
economy by 2010”. At present, there is growing concern that the ambitious targets
will not be reached despite some progress in innovating the Europe’s economy.
Later in January 2006, in its annual progress report on the Lisbon strategy the
Commission has defined 4 priority areas: investment in education and research,
support for Small and Medium Enterprises (SME’s), increase in employment rate and
elaboration of the common EU energy policy.
In can be clearly stated that the Commission is committed to preserve the strategy of
developing synergies between the economic, social and environmental pillars to
achieve goals of the Lisbon strategy. Industry, however, believes that excessive
costs and regulations stand in the way of getting Europe’s competitiveness back on
track.
In several EU Member States, the agro-food industry belongs to 3 top manufacturing
activities, in terms of turnover and in at least 10 countries it is ranked first. In fact, the
annual turnover the agro-food industry is 815 billion Euro and its average growth per
annum during the last 10 years was 1.8%. It employs 4 million workers in 280000
companies of which 99.1% are SME’s. It is still the bigger exporter 45 billion Euro
(2004) than importer 41 billion Euro (2004) but its trade balance is decreasing. On
international markets the EU agro-food industry potential is not sufficiently used less
than 7% of the EU production value is exported and only 6% of the consumed food is
imported.
In reality, the sector is quite conservative and its 77% of the total turnover result from
4 traditional sectors of activity beverages, dairy, meat and starch and confectionery.
Investment in EU agro-food sector differs among countries but as a whole the sector
has not lost its attractiveness.
The competitiveness of the EU agro-food sector, however, is relatively low and is
deteriorating. The major threat does not comes from the established developed
economies like USA, New Zealand, Australia but from emerging economies like
Brazil and China. They do not only increase production volume but also shift to the
higher value added products. As a result, the Europe’s global market share is
decreasing to the benefit of agricultural exporters like Australia, New Zealand, Brazil
and China.
Agricultural raw materials are important and costly component of processed food
products, hence the price paid influence considerably the products competitiveness.
In this respect, the non-EU producers pay less for their raw materials, decreasing
competitiveness of the EU agro-food industry. Taking the above into consideration,
the further development of the WTO Doha Development Round (DDR), the
comprehensive reforms of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) concerning
reduction of the support through institutional prices are going in right direction
improving competitiveness of the EU raw materials and of the EU agro-food industry.
Despite of these facts, the EU products will be still non-competitive for some period
of time so some alternative instruments should provide support for export and access
for competitive raw material.
Maintaining and promoting mainstream quality improvement, as a key European
asset of agriculture production is hence indispensable.
The raw materials are produced according to the best agricultural practice schemes
complying with cross-compliance requirement hence they are costly. Making the
agricultural production more market oriented and to increase competitiveness of the
agricultural raw material used by the processing sector is therefore extremely
important.
The challenges to the European agro-food industry can be responded not only on
economic ground but also in more science-related areas. Research networks and
pan-European initiatives are important tools to effective increase in R&D investment.
Equally important is a broad dissemination of the obtained results and their rapid
utilisation by all companies of the agro-food sector, regardless of their size.
In future development of the European agro-food industry, the focus that has been
given to the quality of agricultural production must be maintained as it is an important
asset of Europe’s farm activity. It is the basis of the European food chain and an
important criterion for the EU agro-food industry supply.
Production of standard mass food caused improvement in qualitative food
parameters and created cheap food products of standardised quality but deprived
them characteristic taste. These products, irrespective of the region have similar
taste and looks similar. They cannot be competitive on the world markets however
secure food availability to the low-income citizens due to low profit margin. The
wealthy societies, in economies of food surplus are seeking for food products of high
quality parameters (ecological food) and these of particular taste for a given region.
The real strength of the EU agro-food sector is
• the large variety of its products,
• its capacity to adjust to consumer demand with a particular emphasis on technically
sophisticated and high value added products.
Faced with relatively saturated European markets the only sources of growth beyond adding further value to food products are growing export markets. High value added agro-food products, however, do not register growth on export that could be expected according to
market expansion
Another obstacle in international trade is use of non-trade barriers such as veterinary,
phyto-sanitary, hygiene, etc. legislation. In these circumstances, the emphasis put on
neighbourhood policy and other regional agreements can contribute to promoting the
use of EU technical regulations and standards through the bilateral approach hence
facilitate EU export
Finally, the consumer and its needs and requests are the most important forces
pushing innovations and product development. In order to compete successfully with
non-European food manufacturers, the European agro-food industry is seeking to
develop affordable, high added value, new and traditional products, which
incorporate healthiness, convenience are of high quality and safe to eat. Together
with a physicians it is also promoting healthy eating and physical activity. Designing
and proposing real actions, the European agro-food industry is promoting the
conditions for healthy habits and to prevent adult and child obesity in a sustainable
way. It is also encouraged for further its product development in line with healthy
lifestyle objectives. To satisfy the customers, the industry should use science-based,
truthful and not misleading nutrition and health claims. To help the European agro-
food industry to deal with the above issues, the CIAA encourages them to implement
its Food and Beverage Principles and the new CIAA Food and Beverage Product
Marketing Communications Principles.
The European agro-food industry should use existing scientific knowledge and
technical expertise to offer and produce enjoyable, good tasting, nutritious,
convenient foods which make easier for consumers to make appropriate food
choices and to follow a diet suitable for their individual life styles, health and physical
activity levels. It is also important that advertising such diet the eating habits of the
prospective consumers should be studied and known in details. In particular, the
intervention in food choice need to be geared towards identified high-risk population
groups taking into account the multiple factors influencing their decision on food
choice. There is a broad consensus that the causes of obesity and related diseases
are mutifactorial. Given this, the solutions need to be multifactorial, involving multiple
approaches and multiple stakeholders.
In Europe and other developed countries people are convinced that appropriate and
balanced dietary habits are an important determinant for healthy lifestyles. There are
many scientific results confirming that longevity of society results from standards and
quality of nutrition of its citizens. An average longevity of the citizens is a result of
nutrition habits and level of medical care. The people are aware that spending money
for high quality healthy food will result in future in lesser amount of money spend on
medicine.
This is a matter of the utmost importance to support public activities aimed
for securing high quality healthy food to the market and to limit access to products
adversely affecting human health (counterfeited products). Taking into account that
EU is the biggest and the most reliable food market in the world there is growing
trend to counterfeit branded products so the protection of brands at EU and
international level is a key importance to maintain European competitive advantage.
In market economy, food-producing companies behave like typical business oriented
enterprises.
That means, food manufacturers are doing everything possible to obtain
the best possible economic results. In the EU, however, the production of food due to
its direct connection with citizens’ health and life is subject to public control at all
production stages from raw material to the final product. There are many existing
regulations aimed to protect citizens against fraudulent food manufacturers (cross-
compliance, tracebility, etc.). Finally, there are also other regulations that are
connected indirectly with food production methods in the whole production chain but
which influence the food quality hence introduced legislation concerning animal
welfare is aimed not only to secure proper living conditions for animals (concentration
of animals, design of production premises, proper transportation conditions, etc.) but
also is assuring final quality of the products that means food for consumers.
The presented, identified challenges to the European agro-food industry are only few
of many others and sooner or later they will be overcame but this makes the work in
this sector of economy and research so exciting and demanding.
What challenges lie ahead?
The current pre-occupation of the ten CEECs is harmonisation of their regulations and agricultural policies with those of the European Union, more specifically, the alignment of agricultural legislation with the EU Acquis Communautaire. This includes bringing administrative capacity and procedures into line with EU requirements, implementing the internal market mechanisms, CAP and EU structural policy, as well as applying the EU agri-statistical methodologies. While significant progress has been made in all CEECs, further efforts are needed to ensure that the necessary institutions are well prepared for implementing and monitoring the rules and regulations. Aligning policies and policy instruments with those of the CAP is a particularly difficult task for the ten CEECs for two reasons.
First, support to agriculture in most CEECs is substantially below the level of the EU and the cost of raising support to the EU level would be considerable and the benefits uncertain. Second, the CAP is likely to continue to evolve in light of both internal and external pressures for further reforms of the EU's agricultural support system.
Further structural reforms are needed to improve the overall performance of the agro-food sector. More investment is needed to improve market infrastructure and to modernise plant and equipment in the processing sector, and further efforts are needed to overcome management inertia. Increased competition on both the domestic and export markets is likely to lead to further restructuring and rationalisation in the food processing sector, in particular in the dairy and meat industries. At the farm level there is a need for consolidation of holdings to ensure the establishment of efficient and viable farming units. Further development of functioning land and land lease markets would greatly speed up this process.
The future trend in agricultural output will not only depend on the prospects for commodity prices, but also on improvements in productivity and competitiveness in the agro-food chain. With the enormous changes already accomplished and continuing reforms, further gains in productivity are likely to be realised in all ten CEECs. Agricultural output is likely to rise in the medium term in response to the better use of resources and improved management in the sector.
There are still significant challenges to be met in improving the efficiency and transparency of factor and product markets for agricultural products.
While substantial progress has been made in developing market infrastructure and improving the price information system, more needs to be done in order for CEECs to be competitive on international markets. Greater emphasis needs to be placed on developing higher value added products and export markets. Enhanced efforts need to be made to improve quality, and to meet the sanitary and phytosanitary standards set by the European Union.
The overall objective of the structural, trade and domestic policy reforms is to develop an efficient, productive, and competitive market oriented agro-food sector that will contribute to economic growth and welfare. While all ten CEECs are focused on adopting and implementing the rules and regulations of the EU in preparation for accession, all CEECs would need to strengthen their market framework in order to enhance efficiency and competitiveness. In this respect, establishing a functioning land market and modernising farming practices is essential in order to develop a viable and sustainable agriculture. Other key challenges facing the CEECs include the need to improve general and market infrastructure, as well as to accelerate adjustment at the farm level by providing off-farm employment opportunities for those leaving agriculture. In this context, greater emphasis on education and training is essential. Improving access to credit in rural areas and raising efficiency in the food processing industry are also of vital importance for further advancement in the agricultural sector
What does our society expect from the agricultural sector and from the food we eat? How can EU policy enhance economic, environmental and social sustainability in agriculture? What does food quality mean and how does quality relate to price?
According to a recent Commission poll, for EU citizens the priorities of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) should be to:
• provide healthy and safe food
• ensure a fair standard of living for farmers
• promote respect of the environment
• guarantee that farm animals are well treated
• help farmers adapt to consumer's expectations
• ensure reasonable prices for consumers
• boost growth and jobs in the rural areas
The main aim of the CAP is to promote quality and safety and a farm sector in tune with the environment and animal welfare. We need to develop an even more sustainable farm and food sector for the future.
Towards more sustainable agricultural production
Sustainable agriculture in Europe is our means of ensuring that future generations can enjoy the benefits of Europe's unique environmental heritage and natural resources, as we do today. But what is meant by sustainable agriculture?
The future European agriculture should be
• economically sustainable
• socially sustainable
• environmentally sustainable
In other words, we aim to create a market-oriented, competitive European farm sector that improves living conditions and employment opportunities in rural areas and lives up to good environmental practices and maintain habitats, biodiversity and landscapes.
It is self evident that a market oriented farmer must reflect consumers' demands in order to be able to sell his products, particularly as regards quality, safety and traditional/organic production methods.
Environmental sustainability is guaranteed through a string of initiatives such as the cross compliance scheme which became compulsory with the 2003 reform.
Under the Rural Development policy which is an integrated part of the CAP, the European Union will make 88.3 billion Euro available for rural development projects in the 27 member states in the period between 2007-2013. A minimum of 25 percent must be spent on projects that support land management and improve the environment. However, in reality, national and regional authorities often decide to spend a far bigger part of the budget on green measures.
Rural development policy also rewards farmers for providing more environmental services in rural areas than what is required of them by law. These agri-environmental measures aim secure the role of farmers as stewards of the countryside and to encourage them to actively preserve the rich rural landscape and biodiversity.
It should not be thought that more environmentally friendly agriculture means old-fashioned methods. For example, organic farming (one form of sustainable farming) uses modern, yet natural, plant-protection methods, which avoid the use of pesticides. Research carried out in universities and agricultural institutes has a key role to play in promoting innovative farming techniques that meet environmental, health and quality standards.
Food quality in all its aspects
For some years now, European consumers' choices have tended to favour healthier and more flavoursome food of higher nutritional value, produced by more environmentally friendly methods. In other words, the guiding principle behind this development is quality.
A question of definition
But what does the concept of quality actually cover?
Consumers are looking for "hard quality", solid measurable facts concerning food safety and hygiene, but they are also increasingly looking for more "soft quality" - food where tradition, history, or animal and environment friendly production methods add extra value to the product.
Food safety and hygiene are, of course, the most fundamental conditions for food quality. Consumers should be able to trust that what they put in their shopping baskets is safe to eat. This is why we have some of the world's highest standards in this area that apply to both home grown and imported products and this is why it is a non negotiable must.
We also request that farmers comply with legally established standards for the environment and animal welfare since they relate to the protection of natural resources and requirements of an ethical nature, in addition to the characteristics of the products.
Some products also have an added value because they are produced in a particular region or by a traditional method (quality labels) or because their production methods pay special attention to the environment and animal welfare (e.g. organic farming).
An area for legislating
The Community's legislative activity in this area is considerable, although it has been directed at very different levels depending on the type and urgency of the issues. Legislation in the food safety field started in the 1960s, grew more intense in the 1990s with the advent of the single market, and, since 1994, has focused on combating animal diseases like bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE). The 1992 and 1999 CAP reforms emphasised agri-environmental measures and aid for extensification, and 1992 also saw the introduction of European quality labels.
Cross-compliance, the principle that farmers should comply with EU rules on environment, food safety, plant health, animal health and welfare as a condition to benefit from EU farm subsidies, was also a key element of the 2003 CAP reform.
Community legislation cannot and should not take over entirely from that of the Member States and attempt to cover all aspects of quality; rather, it should seek to work in tandem on pursuing a policy to foster and promote quality in European agriculture.
Reinforced controls for better consumer protection
The EU has built up a significant body of laws on food safety, animal health, animal welfare and plant health which are binding in all countries of the Union and which partially apply to non-EU countries exporting animals, animal products, plants and plant products to the EU.
While the primary responsibility for ensuring that these laws are respected rests with the 27 Member States, the Commission shares responsibility by ensuring that these EU laws are applied by the Member States. It fulfils this responsibility through the Food and Veterinary Office which was established in April 1997. The Office carries out audits and on-the-spot checks on food safety controls in the Member States and in countries exporting to the EU and reports its findings and recommendations to national and EU authorities but also to the public on their web site.
The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) set up in 2002, provides independent scientific advice on all matters linked to food and feed safety - including animal health and welfare, plant protection and GMOs. The Parma based agency also provides scientific advice on nutrition in relation to Community legislation. The Authority communicates to the public in an open and transparent way on all matters within its remit. EFSA's risk assessments provide European decision makers with a sound scientific basis for defining policy driven laws required to ensure a high level of consumer protection with regards to food safety.
General principles of food law - European Food Safety Authority - Procedures for food safety
The general principles of food law were reviewed in 2002, as were the procedures relating to food safety, which apply also to animal nutrition. Controls and monitoring take place throughout the food production chain, "from farm to table". The legislation governing the general principles and harmonised controls also underpins the European Food Safety Authority, a European agency which provides the scientific reference point for food-related control and evaluation.
ACT
Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European 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 [ See amending acts ].
SUMMARY
The White Paper on food safety emphasises the need for a policy underpinned by a sound scientific basis and up-to-date legislation. The general overhaul of EU legislation is designed to restore consumer confidence in the wake of recent food-related crises, with all the interested parties having a part to play: the general public, non-governmental organisations, professional associations, trading partners and international trade organisations.
The free movement of safe and wholesome food is a key principle in the smooth functioning of the internal market. Since differences between the food laws of the Member States may hamper the free movement of foodstuffs, it is necessary to define at EU level a common basis for measures governing human food and animal feed.
With a view to adopting a comprehensive, integrated "farm to table" approach, legislation must cover all aspects of the food production chain: primary production, processing, transport, distribution through to the sale or supply of food and feed. At all stages of this chain, the legal responsibility for ensuring the safety of foodstuffs rests with the operator. A similar system should apply to feed business operators.
The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) enhances the current scientific and technical support system. Its main task is to provide assistance and independent scientific advice, and to create a network geared to close cooperation with similar bodies in the Member States. It assesses risks relating to the food chain and informs the general public accordingly.
Lastly, the recent food crises have shown that it is necessary to improve the procedures relating to food safety. For this reason,the scope of the rapid alert system was extended to cover animal feed and to identify measures to be taken in emergencies and for crisis management. A Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health is also being set up to replace the existing committees.
GENERAL FOOD LAW
General food law covers all stages of the food production chain. The related principles and procedures in force must be adapted as soon as possible, and by 1 January 2007 at the latest.
General principles
The objectives pursued by means of food law are:
• protection of human life and health, and protection of consumers' interests, with due regard for the protection of animal health and welfare, plant health and the environment;
• EU-wide free movement of human food and animal feed;
• consideration of existing or planned international standards.
Food law is based mainly on risk analysis drawing on the available scientific evidence. Under the precautionary principle , the Member States and the Commission may take appropriate provisional risk-management measures when an assessment points to the likelihood of harmful health effects and there is a lack of scientific certainty.
There is a requirement for transparent public consultation, directly or through representative bodies, during the preparation, evaluation and revision of food law. When a food or feed product is deemed to constitute a risk, the authorities must inform the general public of the nature of the risk to human or animal health.
General obligations in the food trade
Food and feed imported with a view to being placed on the market or exported to a third country must comply with the relevant requirements of EU food law.
The European Union and its Member States must contribute to the development of international technical standards for food and feed, as well as for animal health and plant protection.
General requirements of food law
Food must not be placed on the market if it is unsafe, i.e. if it is harmful to health and/or unfit for consumption. In determining whether any food is unsafe, account is taken of the normal conditions of use, the information provided to the consumer, the likely immediate or delayed effect on health, the cumulative toxic effects and, where appropriate, the particular health sensitivities of a specific category of consumers. If food which is unsafe forms part of a batch, lot or consignment, the entire quantity is presumed to be unsafe.
Feed must not be placed on the market or given to any food-producing animal if it is unsafe. Feed is deemed to be unsafe if it has an adverse effect on human or animal health. The entire quantity of a batch, lot or consignment is considered unsafe if any part of it fails to satisfy the requirements.
At all stages of the food production chain, business operators must ensure that food and feed satisfies the requirements of food law and that those requirements are being adhered to. The Member States enforce the law, ensuring that operators comply with it and laying down appropriate measures and penalties for infringements.
The traceability of food, feed, food-producing animals and all substances incorporated into foodstuffs must be established at all stages of production, processing and distribution. To this end, business operators are required to apply appropriate systems and procedures.
If an operator considers that a food or feed product which has been imported, produced, processed, manufactured or distributed is harmful to human or animal health, steps must be taken immediately to withdraw the product from the market and to inform the competent authorities accordingly. In cases where a product may have reached consumers, the operator must inform them and recall the products already supplied.
EUROPEAN FOOD SAFETY AUTHORITY (EFSA)
A European Food Safety Authority ("the Authority") will provide scientific advice and scientific and technical support in all areas impacting on food safety. It constitutes an independent source of information on all matters in this field and ensures that the general public is kept informed.
Participation in the Authority is open to the Member States of the European Union and to other countries applying EU food safety law.
The Authority is endowed with legal personality. The Court of Justice of the European Communities has jurisdiction in any dispute relating to contractual liability.
The Authority's tasks
In the areas within its sphere of competence, the tasks of the European Food Safety Authority are as follows:
• To provide the European institutions and the Member States with the best possible scientific advice on its own initiative or at the request of the Commission, the European Parliament or a Member State.
The Authority's independent scientific opinions have to do with matters of food safety and other related issues (animal and plant health, GMOs, nutrition, etc.). They serve as a basis for policy decisions in respect of risk management.
As regards the scientific evaluation of substances, products or processes which are subject to a system of prior authorisation or registration on a positive list under EU law, sectoral Regulations or Directives of the European Parliament and of the Council lay down the procedures whereby the Authority's scientific opinions are delivered.
• To promote and coordinate the development of uniform risk assessment methods.
• To provide scientific and technical support to the Commission.
Scientific and technical assistance involves scientific work for which the expertise of the Authority's Scientific Committee and Panels is not needed (e.g. evaluation of technical criteria).
The Authority will also provide scientific support in connection with crisis management.
• To commission scientific studies necessary for the accomplishment of its mission, whilst avoiding any duplication with European or national research programmes.
• To search for, collect, collate, analyse and summarise scientific and technical data in areas relating to food safety (exposure of individuals to risks arising from consumption of foodstuffs, biological risks, contaminants and residues).
The Commission is required to publish a report on the existing data collection systems at European level.
• To take action to identify and characterise emerging risks.
The Authority will establish monitoring procedures geared to searching for, collecting, collating and analysing information and data with a view to the identification of emerging risks.
• To build up European networks of organisations operating in the field of food safety.
The Authority will participate in the rapid alert system linking the Commission and the Member States. It will encourage the exchange of information, knowledge and good practice, the coordination of action and the implementation of joint projects.
The Commission is to compile an inventory of European-level data collection systems.
• To provide, at the request of the Commission, scientific and technical support aimed at improving cooperation between the Commission, the candidate countries, international organisations and third countries.
• To ensure that the general public and other interested parties receive reliable, objective and comprehensible information.
• To express its own conclusions and ideas on matters within its remit.
Organisation
The main components of the Authority are:
Management Board
The 14 members of the Management Board are appointed by the Council, in consultation with the European Parliament, from a list drawn up by the Commission. Four of the members are required to have a background in consumer organisations and other interests in the food production chain. The Commission is represented on the Management Board. Although the members' term of office is four years, which may be renewed once for a maximum of five years, the initial term of office for half of the members is six years. The Management Board elects its Chairperson for a two-year period, which is renewable. It adopts the rules of procedure, the work programme, the preliminary draft budget and the final budget (following the Budgetary Authority's vote on the general budget), and the general activity report. The Management Board must ensure that the Authority performs the tasks assigned to it under the conditions laid down in the founding Regulation.
Executive Director
The Executive Director is appointed by the Management Board, on the basis of a list proposed by the Commission, for a period of five years which may be renewed for a period not exceeding five years, and is the legal representative of the Authority. Prior to being appointed, the nominee is invited to make a statement before the European Parliament and to reply to questions put by its Members. The Executive Director is responsible mainly for the day-to-day administration of the Authority and for implementation of the budget. He or she draws up a proposal for the work programme, in consultation with the Commission, and implements it, maintains contact with the European Parliament and forwards the general report on the Authority's activities to the European institutions and bodies by 15 June of each year at the latest.
Advisory Forum
Comprising one representative per Member State (representing national bodies responsible for risk assessment), the Forum advises the Executive Director in the performance of the latter's duties, particularly in connection with drawing up the work programme and prioritising requests for scientific opinions. Chaired by the Executive Director, the Forum meets at least four times a year. It encourages the European networking of national bodies operating within the Authority's fields of activity: exchanging information, pooling knowledge and making the most of the available resources.
Scientific Committee and Scientific Panels
These are composed of independent scientific experts appointed for three years by the Management Board on a proposal from the Executive Director. They are responsible for adopting the Authority's scientific opinions within their respective spheres of competence.
Scientific Committee
Composed of the chairpersons of the scientific panels and six independent experts. Responsible for general coordination with the scientific panels, it may also organise public debates and set up working groups on matters which do not fall within the competence of the
scientific panels.
Scientific Panels
The nine Scientific Panels are: 1) Panel on additives, flavourings, processing aids and materials in contact with food; 2) Panel on additives and products or substances used in animal feed; 3) Panel on plant protection products and their residues; 4) Panel on genetically modified organisms; 5) Panel on dietetic products, nutrition and allergies; 6) Panel on biological hazards; 7) Panel on contaminants in the food chain; 8) Panel on animal health and welfare; 9) Panel on plant health.
The Executive Director and the members of all the bodies of the Authority undertake to act independently in the public interest. They must make a declaration of commitment and a declaration of interest indicating any interests, whether direct or indirect, which might be considered prejudicial to their independence.
The Authority will carry out its activities with a high level of transparency. In this connection, it will make public the agendas and minutes of meetings of the Scientific Committee and the Scientific Panels, the opinions adopted, the results of scientific studies, its final accounts, the annual report of activities and the annual declarations of interest made by the aforementioned parties. The Authority must ensure that the public is given objective and accessible information. The decisions it takes pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 regarding access to documents may form the subject of a complaint to the Ombudsman or an action before the Court of Justice.
Financial provisions
The Authority's budget, presented by 31 March each year at the latest, consists of revenue (contributions from the European Union and from any candidate country or third party involved, charges for publications, conferences, training, etc.) and expenditure (staff, administrative, infrastructure and operational expenses, contracts entered into with third parties). It must be in balance.
Acting as the budgetary authority, the European Parliament and the Council will authorise the appropriations for the subsidy to the Authority. On a recommendation of the Council, the Parliament will, before 30 April of year "N + 2", give a discharge to the Executive Director in respect of the implementation of the budget for year "N".
PROCEDURES RELATING TO FOOD SAFETY
Existing procedures have been beefed up.
Rapid alert system
The rapid alert system now covers all foodstuffs and animal feed. The network involves the Member States, the Commission in a management capacity and, innovatively, the Authority as a member of the network.
By means of this rapid alert system, the Member States notify the Commission, which immediately transmits the information throughout the network, of:
• any measure aimed at restricting the placing on the market or forcing the withdrawal or recall of food or feed;
• any measure involving professional operators aimed at preventing or controlling the use of food or feed;
• any rejection of a batch or consignment of food or feed by a competent authority at a border post of the European Union.
• Information concerning a food-related risk which is disseminated within the rapid alert network must be made available to the general public.
•
Emergencies
Where food or feed originating in the EU or imported from a third country is likely to constitute a serious risk to human health, animal health or the environment, and the risk cannot be controlled by measures taken by the Member State(s) concerned, the Commission is to adopt immediately, on its own initiative or at the request of a Member State, one or more of the following measures, depending on the gravity of the situation:
• for products of EU origin: suspension of the placing on the market or use of the product in question, imposition of special conditions and adoption of any other appropriate interim measure;
• for products imported from a third country: suspension of imports, imposition of special conditions and adoption of any other appropriate interim measure.
Such measures are adopted by the committee procedure (Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health).
However, in emergencies, the Commission alone may provisionally adopt the necessary measures, after consulting the Member State(s) concerned and informing the other Member States. In such a case, the provisional measures in question must, within 10 working days at most, be confirmed, amended, revoked or extended in the context of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health.
When a Member State officially informs the Commission of the need to take emergency measures and the Commission does not act, the Member State may take interim protective measures. It should immediately inform the other Member States and the Commission thereof. Within a period of 10 working days, the Commission must refer the matter to the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health with a view to extending, amending or revoking the national interim protective measures.
General crisis-management plan
In close cooperation with the Authority and the Member States, the Commission is required to draw up a general plan for crisis management, specifying the situations entailing direct or indirect risks to human health not provided for by the Regulation, and setting out the practical procedures necessary for managing a resultant crisis.
When a situation involving a serious risk cannot be dealt with under the existing provisions, the Commission must immediately set up a crisis unit, in which the Authority participates by providing scientific and technical support. The crisis unit is responsible for collecting and evaluating all relevant information and identifying the options available for preventing, eliminating or reducing the risk to human health.
Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health
A Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health, composed of representatives of the Member States and chaired by the Commission representative, is organised in sections to deal with all the relevant matters.
Final provisions
The Authority publishes its annual activity report before 15 June each year.
Before 1 January 2005, the Commission will publish a report on the experience acquired from implementing the rapid alert system and dealing with emergencies.
Before 1 January 2005, and every six years thereafter, the Authority will commission an independent external evaluation of its achievements, the impact of its activities and its working practices.
In EU legislation, reference to the European Food Safety Authority will replace every reference to the Scientific Committee on Food, the Scientific Committee on Animal Nutrition, the Scientific Veterinary Committee, the Scientific Committee on Pesticides, the Scientific Committee on Plants and the Scientific Steering Committee.
In EU legislation, reference to the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health will replace every reference to the Standing Committee on Foodstuffs, the Standing Committee for Feedingstuffs, the Standing Veterinary Committee and the Standing Committee on Plant Health relating to plant protection products and the setting of maximum residue levels.
Decisions 68/361/EEC, 69/414/EEC and 70/372/EEC are repealed.
The precautionary principle
The precautionary principle may be invoked where urgent measures are needed in the face of a possible danger to human, animal or plant health, or to protect the environment where scientific data do not permit a complete evaluation of the risk. It may not be used as a pretext for protectionist measures. This principle is applied mainly where there is a danger to public health. For example, it may be used to stop distribution or order withdrawal from the market of products likely to constitute a health hazard.
ACT
Communication from the Commission of 2 February 2000 on the precautionary principle [COM(2000) 1 final - Not published in the Official Journal].
SUMMARY
The EC Treaty contains only one explicit reference to the precautionary principle, namely in the title on environmental protection. However, in practice, the scope of this principle is far wider and also covers consumer policy and human, animal and plant health.
Since the precautionary principle is not defined in the Treaty or in other Community instruments, the Council in its Resolution of 13 April 1999 requested the Commission to develop clear and effective guidelines for the application of the principle. The Commission's Communication is a response to this request.
The establishment of common guidelines on the application of the precautionary principle will also have positive repercussions at international level.
The principle has been recognised in various international agreements, notably in the Sanitary and Phytosanitary Agreement (SPS) concluded in the framework of the World Trade Organisation (WTO).
A clear definition as to how the Community intends to use the precautionary principle with a view to ensuring an appropriate level of environmental and health protection can contribute to the discussions already launched in these international arenas.
In its Communication, the Commission analyses the factors that trigger use of the precautionary principle and the associated measures. It then proposes guidelines for applying the principle.
The factors triggering use of the precautionary principle
According to the Commission the precautionary principle may be invoked when the potentially dangerous effects of a phenomenon, product or process have been identified by a scientific and objective evaluation, and this evaluation does not allow the risk to be determined with sufficient certainty. Hence use of the principle belongs in the general framework of risk analysis (which, besides risk evaluation, includes risk management and risk communication), and more particularly in the context of risk management which corresponds to decision-making.
The Commission stresses that the precautionary principle may only be invoked in the event of a potential risk and that it can never justify arbitrary decisions.
Hence the precautionary principle may only be invoked when the three preliminary conditions are met - identification of potentially adverse effects, evaluation of the scientific data available and the extent of scientific uncertainty.
The measures resulting from use of the precautionary principle
As regards the measures resulting from use of the precautionary principle, they may take the form of a decision to act or not to act.
The response depends on a political decision and is a function of the level of risk considered "acceptable" by the society on which the risk is imposed.
When action without awaiting further scientific information seems to be the appropriate response to the risk in application of the precautionary principle, a decision still has to be taken as to the nature of this action. Besides the adoption of legal instruments subject to review by the courts, there are a whole raft of measures for decision-makers to choose from (funding of a research programme, informing the public as to the adverse effects of a product or procedure, etc.).
Under no circumstances may the measure be selected on the basis of an arbitrary decision.
Guidelines for use of the precautionary principle
The precautionary principle should be informed by three specific principles:
• implementation of the principle should be based on the fullest possible scientific evaluation. As far as possible this evaluation should determine the degree of scientific uncertainty at each stage;
• any decision to act or not to act pursuant to the precautionary principle must be preceded by a risk evaluation and an evaluation of the potential consequences of inaction;
• once the results of the scientific evaluation and/or the risk evaluation are available, all the interested parties must be given the opportunity to study of the various options available, while ensuring the greatest possible transparency.
Besides these specific principles, the general principles of good risk management remain applicable when the precautionary principle is invoked. These are the following five principles:
• proportionality between the measures taken and the chosen level of protection;
• non-discrimination in application of the measures;
• consistency of the measures with similar measures already taken in similar situations or using similar approaches;
• examination of the benefits and costs of action or lack of action;
• review of the measures in the light of scientific developments.
• The burden of proof
Apart from the rules applicable to products such as drugs, pesticides or food additives, Community legislation does not prescribe a prior authorisation system for placing products on the market. Thus in most cases it is for the users, the citizens or consumer associations to demonstrate the danger associated with a procedure or a product after it has been placed on the market.
According to the Commission, an action taken under the precautionary principle may in certain cases include a clause shifting the burden of proof to the producer, manufacturer or importer. This possibility should be examined on a case-by-case basis; the Commission does not recommend the general extension of such an obligation to all products.
|
|
