Brussels, 12/04/2007 (Agence Europe) - Members of the environment, public health and food safety committee of the European Parliament fully support clarification and updating of existing Community legislation on enzymes, additives and flavourings. Their demands on transparency, however, go further than those of the European Commission. On 11 April, the committee gave first reading approval to two reports by Asa Westlund (PES, Sweden) calling for consumers to have the right to know what they are eating, and for Parliament's right to retain its role as co-decision maker.
Under scrutiny were two draft regulations presented by the European Commission last July (see EUROPE 9242) to update and replace existing legislative arrangements. The first regulation, considered in the first report, set out a common authorisation procedure for additives, enzymes and flavourings. The second, the subject of the second report, was to regulate food additives, for which a specific list of authorised products will be drawn up, along with conditions for use and labelling rules.
While voting for harmonisation of differing national assessment, authorisation and monitoring systems of food enzymes, the members of the Parliamentary committee unanimously felt that the single authorisation procedure proposed by the Commission had to be more transparent - something that not only was necessary to win consumer confidence, but would also benefit the food industry. In line with their rapporteur's view, they called for all decisions and the reasons behind them to be made public, that a producer, whose competitive position might be harmed, have scientific data protection for five years, that all requests for authorisation to place a product on the market must be notified to the European Parliament and interested parties, and submitted to the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), whose opinions must be made public, and that all authorisations be re-examined at regular intervals, with Parliament being involved.
The European Commission felt the codecision procedure was too cumbersome to allow the regular updating of lists and proposed to take control of the matter itself, after consultation with the standing committee on the food chain, made up of experts from the member states. MEPs, against the comitology procedure which would allow Parliament to be by-passed, re-established the codecision rules so that they would continue to be consulted.
Committee members voted by an overwhelming majority (54 votes for, one against) to extend the list of conditions to be met for food additives to be authorised. Apart from the requirements not to put the health of consumers or vulnerable groups in danger, to be technologically necessary in terms of benefits to the consumer, and not to mislead the consumer (as the Commission proposed), MEPs added that additives must not have a harmful effect on the environment. Both Westlund reports will be put to the plenary session vote in June or July. Two other regulations proposed by the Commission in the same legislative package (one on enzymes and the other on flavourings) will be dealt with in a report by Drcar Murco (ALDE, Slovenia) which is due to be voted on in committee on 8 May. (an)