Brussels, 20/07/2000 (Agence Europe) - On the whole very satisfied with the new food safety rules that the Commission is proposing to introduce into the Union (see EUROPE of 19 July, p.13), the BEUC (the European Consumers' Organisation) expresses some reservation about specific points which, it says, deserve to be improved upon, and awaits impatiently the opportunity to take part in future discussions on this part of the legislation that it considers highly important.
With this proposal, "food safety is close at hand", stresses BEUC in a press release. The consumers' defence organisation considers that harmonisation and simplification of the European food and veterinary legislation is a decisive step along the right road. This initiative is all the more praiseworthy as, in opting for regulations, the Commission gave preference to provisions that are directly applicable - an advantage that would not have been given by directives whose transposition into Member State legislation requires a great deal of time, stresses BEUC.
The mad cow crisis and the scandal over food contaminated by dioxin in Belgium showed that consumers were not sufficiently protected against the risks of illnesses transmissible by foodstuffs, and BEUC therefore considers that a new approach allowing food safety to be guaranteed through traceability of products throughout the food chain is the only solution, and that the Commission proposal is a new tool for achieving this aim. Supporting a clear definition of the responsibilities at every point along the food chain and industrial self-monitoring based on the HACCP (Harmonised Hazard Analysis Critical control Point) principles, BEUC welcomes the fact that the Commission had adopted this system which, in its view, should help to rapidly identify the sources of contamination in the event of crisis.
The criticism or suggestions made for attenuating these praises concern:
1) The doubts expressed by BEUC regarding how appropriate it is to incorporate veterinary legislation into hygiene legislation (which is an excellent idea in itself) without having previously proceeded to harmonisation of the veterinary legislation which, according to BEUC, is greatly needed (the EU, for example, set out microbiological norms for milk but not for minced meat.
2) The need, according to BEUC, to harmonise the proposal concerning food hygiene with other food safety regulations (the definition of meat in the proposal on hygiene differs from that contained in the proposal on food labelling, for example).
3) The regret that the entry into force of the regulation on animal feed is foreseen for 1 January 2004 and not before, which will delay by this much the incorporation of animal feed in the scope of these new rules. Stressing that the link established between the hygiene of animal feed and that of food for human consumption is vital (since animal feed is at the origin of the recent food scandals), BEUC wonders what will happen in the meantime.