EU - Special Documentation April 2002

Impatiently waiting for EFSA

Brussels, 11-12 April 2002. The Confederation of Food and Drink Industries of the European Union (CIAA) hosted the 2002 "European Food Summit". This traditional gathering allowed representatives of an industry with 600 billions euros in production value, consisting of 26.000 companies and 2.6 million employees in Europe, to meet once again and discuss matters of common interest.

The list of speakers was a real "Who-is-who" of the food-industry: Not only decision makers of some leading companies (Migros, Kraft, Unilever, Weetabix and Nestle) voiced their opinions, but also the manager of a consumer group (Ann Davison, UK Woman of Europe 2000), experts in environmental questions and social sciences. However, the speakers of the highest profile were the EU Commissioners Fischler and Byrne.

As can be expected in a meeting of this magnitude, differences in opinion did emerge and some politely worded blames were distributed, especially as far as the responsibilities for the BSE-catastrophe and following unrest among consumers are concerned. In this context one major common preoccupation became clear very quickly: how to regain confidence? "Safety first!" was called for by all, leading to questions of how to achieve more generally shouldered responsibility. Additional transparency, clearer traceability and improved labelling were proposed: Different speakers offered different suggestions as to how present unease could be overcome. But in an impressive concurrence, all seemed to pin their hopes on a new safety-net-organisation about to be created: The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA).

After years of preparation, the Agriculture Council had adopted the EU
Food Law last January and thereby made the last legislative step towards the effective creation of this new organisation. Already in January, the CIAA had commented that it was of utmost importance that the Management Board and the Executive Director would be nominated as soon as possible. Obviously CIAA-managers are not the only ones waiting for operations to commence. However, more patience will be needed, at least until Autumn or even until the end of the year _ according to Commissioner Byrne. Also the question of where this new organisation is to be based has not been decided yet. In the interest of obtaining total EFSA-independence, Brussels is not considered as an acceptable choice.

Even considering the acknowledged fact that procedures in the European bureaucratic environment do take time (and plenty of it!): such delays certainly are seriously counter-productive as the problems touching the meat-industry are indeed far from over! Just a few of the latest headlines can easily illustrate the urgency for rapid action in the interest of consumers' health:

Germany

The beginning of February almost 8000 tons of beef had to be destroyed in Bavaria because of faulty BSE-tests, in Bremen 2500 BSE-tests had to be classified as "not reliable" after the meat had already been put on the market. Furthermore there had been irregularities in the testing-procedures
in Baden-Wuerttemberg and Rhineland-Palatinate and the confession that almost half of all private BSE-labs in the South West of Germany delivered faulty results.

(different newspaper reports)

Ireland

Pollutants found in fish oil capsules _ Trout were tested for contaminants. Enormous variations in the level of potentially cancer-causing pollutants have been found in fish oil capsules. The Food Safety Authority of Ireland (FSAI) examined a range of the capsules for the presence of dioxins. It is vital that manufacturers and suppliers of these products ensure that they do not contain high levels of dioxins.

(BBC Health, 6 April, 2002)

UK

Human Version of `Mad Cow' on Rise Increase Reflects Delay of Symptoms, Not New Cases, British Expert Says

(Washington Post 27 March 2002)

France

PARIS _ A sixth person in France has contracted variant Creutzfeld-Jakob disease, linked to so-called mad cow disease, authorities said Friday, 29 March 2002

(Yahoo News)

Italy

ROME - Italy's Health Ministry on Friday reported the country's 60th case of mad cow disease. A 7-year-old animal from a breeding farm near Piacenza, in northern Italy, tested positive in analyses performed by a Turin-based zoological institute.

(Yahoo News 29 March 2002)

But what actually is this Authority that everyone is putting so much hope on? The following excerpt of "EU MEMO/01/248 REVISED _ Brussels, 18 December 2001" offers some information.

New fears

Reburial of cattle ashes sparks fear of BSE pollution in water

February 9, 2002: Scores of foot and mouth disposal sites around England are being dug up after almost a year amid fears that water supplies could be contaminated.

On a different note it must be stated that the issue of animal welfare seems of none or negligible importance in these circles. There was talk of "raw products" and "healthy animals giving healthy food" as well as some timid remarks of "growing awareness of consumers towards ethical questions" (Ann Davison), but experts taking an interest in animals and their well-being had not been invited to comment. Even considering that this summit was in the interest of business and commercial success, the absence of animal-advocates seems like a missed opportunity. Should the growing number of vegetarians everywhere not be an indication that a fast developing ethical awareness is indeed a fact that needs to be dealt with seriously and pro-actively? Why not include the idea of a meatless lifestyle into future scenarios instead of concentrating solely on the question of how to re-activate the appetite for roasts and burgers?

Does "new food" stand exclusively for genetically modified products (the "blessings" of which seemed to be generally accepted)? Why not consider as "new" also a changed diet, namely one without meat and fish, the advantages of which have long been confirmed and are not even disputable any longer. Should the food industry really not be aware that all studies over long periods and with thousands of participants always led to the same conclusion: a vegetarian diet is a healthy one? Would an all-encompassing commercial food-strategy not demand to also cater for a rapidly growing number of those consumers looking for meatless products? After all, we are all willing and able to pay for food that respects our vegetarian way of contributing to a better environment. In this context is might seem as a promising token that EVU representation had been invited …

Herma Caelen

EFSA: Basics and Tasks

What will be the tasks of the European Food Safety Authority?

As set out in the Commission proposal for a Regulation laying down fundamental principles and requirements of food law and establishing a European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), the core task of the Authority will be to provide independent scientific advice and support and to set up a network for close co-operation with similar bodies in Member States. It will assess risks related to the food chain and give the general public information about food risks.

The EFSA will have six main tasks:

_ provide independent scientific advice on food safety issues and other related matters such as ani
mal health/welfare, plant health, GMOs and nutrition at the request of the Commission, the European Parliament (EP) and the Member States as a basis for risk management decisions;

_ advice on technical food issues to underpin policy development and legislation related to the food chain;

_ collection and analysis of data on dietary, exposure and other information relevant to any potential risks necessary to monitor safety along the food chain in the EU;

_ identification and early warning of emerging risks;

_ support to the Commission in case of crisis;

_ communication to the general public on all matters within its mandate.

When will the Regulation setting up the EFSA be adopted and the Authority become operational?

(…)The Commission is doing everything possible to ensure that (..)key operations can start as early as possible in 2002.

What is the legal status of the EFSA?

The Authority will be a separate legal entity, independent from the other Community institutions. This means that the Executive Director is not therefore answerable to the Commission or other Community or national institutions but to a Management Board.(…)

What is the scope of the EFSA work?

Its mandate is broad, so that it can take a comprehensive view of the food chain and provide a coherent scientific basis for policy and legislation. Therefore the EFSA will cover all issues having a direct or indirect impact on the safety of food including plant health, animal health and welfare. It covers also scientific issues related to nutrition.

Discovery of BSE cow dashes hopes of reducing controls

February 8, 2002: Hopes of reducing BSE controls may have suffered a mortal blow as government agencies yesterday revealed that the youngest confirmed case in a cow for six years had been found in Northern Ireland.

( Source: The Guardian)

Government research mix-up

New director for shamed animal institute

January 23, 2002: Professor Paul-Pierre Pastoret is the new director of the Institute for Animal Health, which recently mistook cows' brains for those of sheep when carrying out BSE research.

( Source: The Guardian)

BSE in deer

Scientists widen BSE checks to deer

December 24, 2001: Government scientists are to check deer to see whether they harbour BSE-like diseases under a research programme designed to close loopholes in the battle against the disease.

( Source: The Guardian)

What is the organisational set-up of the EFSA?

The European Food Safety Authority is composed of four bodies: a Management Board, an Executive Director an Advisory Forum and a co-ordinating scientific committee and eight scientific panels.

Management Board

(…)The composition and selection procedures will ensure that the Authority has an independent Board with members appointed on the basis of the highest standards of competence and a broad range of relevant experience. The European Parliament adopted an amendment which has the apparent support of the Council and the Commission that would put in place a management board of fourteen members, and with an additional representative of the Commission. Four members of the Board will have backgrounds in consumer and industry matters.(…)

Advisory Forum

The Executive Director will be assisted by an Advisory Forum, composed of fifteen representatives, one per Member State, from bodies in the Member States undertaking similar tasks to those of EFSA, such as national agencies performing risk assessments in the food sector. (…)

Scientific Panels

The Scientific Panels will be composed of independent scientific experts (…)

The following panels will be established:

_ panel on food additives, flavourings, processing aids and materials in contact with food;

_ panel on additives and products or substances used in animal feed;

_ panel on plant health, plant protection products and their residues;

_ panel on genetically modified organisms;

_ panel on dietetic products, nutrition and allergies;

_ panel on biological hazards (including TSE/BSE issues);

_ panel on contaminants in the food chain;

_ panel on animal health and welfare.

(…)

Personnel and budget

The EFSA will be funded from the Community budget based on a proposal from the Commission and approved by the budgetary authority of the Council and the European Parliament. When fully operational, the Authority will have access to substantial in-house scientific expertise. The Authority will employ up to 250 people after three years, with a budget of approximately €40 million. This will be reviewed after 3 years. (…)

What is the role of the EFSA and of the Advisory Forum in case of conflicting scientific opinions?

The European Food Safety Authority will have the explicit task to watch out for and identify any potential source of conflict between its scientific opinions and the scientific opinions issued by other bodies carrying out similar tasks. In case the EFSA identifies potentially conflicting scientific views involving its own advice and other Community bodies, it shall ensure that all relevant scientific information is shared between those concerned. If such conflicting scientific positions involve a national scientific body, the EFSA and this body shall co-operate and the EFSA's Advisory Forum shall be consulted. In both cases, the aim is to either resolve the conflict or to present a joint document clarifying the contentious scientific issues thereby enabling the risk managers to adopt the most appropriate measures in the light of all information available.

How will the independence of the EFSA be ensured?

EFSA is an independent body with an autonomous right to create its own organisation and to communicate. Members of the Management Board, the Advisory Forum and scientists on the panels shall act independently.(…)

What can the EFSA do to prevent the food crises of the past?

The Authority will have a clear pro-active role in collection and analysis of scientific and other relevant types of data, allowing for identification and early warning of emerging risks in the food chain.

Will the EFSA communicate its position directly to the public?

vCJD may have been passed on in blood

January 29, 2002: Twenty-two people who unknowingly received blood donations from victims of the human form of BSE are to be told that they may have been infected with the fatal disease.

( Source: The Guardian)

Poor storage blamed for BSE fiasco

December 1, 2001 : Labelling, storage and record-keeping blunders were the most likely explanation for the "wrong brains" fiasco which caused the collapse of crucial tests into whether BSE might have spread from cows to sheep.

( Source: The Guardian)

Will the transparency rules of the current scientific committees also apply to the EFSA?

The opinions of the Scientific Committee and the scientific panels, including minority opinions, shall be made public.(…)

What will be the EFSA's role in crisis management?

The European Commission remains responsible for proposing risk management measures to the European Parliament and Council, and for deciding emergency measures. Risk management measures may include marketing bans, restrictions or specific conditions for the marketing of food or feed. The Commission may under the new rules proposed in the regulation adopt emergency measures relative to any food or feed, in case of a serious risk. (...) The crisis unit would equally be in charge of measures to inform the public in times of crises. The EFSA will also be a member of the Rapid Alert System that will remain managed by the Commission. This new system will cover food and now animal feed. Any information on a serious direct or indirect risk to human health deriving from food or feed must be notified via the competent national authorities to the rapid alert. The same goes for all measures taken to restrict the marketing of a product, whether of EU origin or imported.(…)