1. The Seventeenth Session of the Joint FAO/WHO Codex Alimentarius Commission was held at FAO Headquarters, Rome, from 29 June to 10 July 1987. The Session was attended by 321 participants, including the representatives and observers of 60 countries and observers from 31 international organizations (see Appendix I for List of Participants).
2. The Commission was presided over by its Chairman, Mr. E.F. Kimbrell (USA) and from Item 25 of the agenda by Dr. E.R. Méndez (Mexico), one of its Vice-Chairman. The Joint Secretaries were Dr. A.W. Randell (FAO/WHO) and Dr. F. Käferstein (WHO).
3. The Session was opened by the Director-General of FAO, Mr. Edouard Saouma, the text of whose address is contained in Appendix II of this Report. The response of the Chairman is contained in Appendix III.
ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA AND TIMETABLE
4. The Commission noted that Item 21(c) of the Provisional Agenda “International Maximum Limits for Radionuclide Contamination of Foods” had been cancelled by FAO and WHO and that the report of the FAO Expert Consultation on Recommended Limits of Radionuclide Contamination of Food would be presented and discussed under Item 8. The Commission adopted the amended Provisional Agenda and Timetable.
ELECTION OF OFFICERS OF THE COMMISSION AND MEMBERS OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
5. During the Session, the Commission elected Dr. E. Méndez (Mexico) as Chairman of the Commission to serve from the end of the Seventeenth to the end of the Eighteenth Session. The Commission also elected Dr. J.K. Misoi (Kenya), Dr. N. Tape (Canada), and Prof. F.G. Winarno (Indonesia) as Vice-Chairmen of the Commission to serve from the end of the Seventeenth to the end of the Eighteenth Session.
6. The following Members of the Commission were elected to represent the geographical locations described in Rule III. 1 of the Rules of Procedure of the Commission to hold office from the end of the Seventeenth to the end of the Nineteenth Session: Cameroon - Africa; Thailand - Asia; The Netherlands - Europe; Cuba - Latin America and the Caribbean; United States of America - North America; Australia - South West Pacific.
Appointment of Regional Coordinators
7. The following persons were appointed as Regional Coordinators for: Africa - Mr. Tawfic Zaglool (Egypt); Asia - Prof. F.G. Winarno (Indonesia); Europe - Dr. H. Woidich (Austria); Latin America and the Caribbean - Lic. Maria Eugenia Chacón Moroux (Costa Rica).
REPORT BY THE CHAIRMAN ON THE THIRTY-THIRD AND THIRTY-FOURTH SESSIONS OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
8. In introducing the reports of the Thirty-Third and Thirty-Fourth Sessions of the Executive Committee contained in documents ALINORM 87/3 and ALINORM 87/4, respectively, the Chairman indicated that all items considered by the Executive Committee would be dealt with by the Commission under agenda items relating to the matters concerned.
MEMBERSHIP OF THE CODEX ALIMENTARIUS COMMISSION
9. The Commission had before it a List of Members of the Codex Alimentarius. The Membership is set out in Appendix V to this report. The Commission noted that since its last session Saint Lucia had become a member of the Commission, bringing the total membership to 130.
10. The Commission requested the Secretariat to intensify its efforts to complete the membership and to stress the benefits of participation in Codex work.
PROGRESS REPORT ON THE PUBLICATION OF THE CODEX ALIMENTARIUS AND ON DISTRIBUTION ARRANGEMENTS
11. The Commission had before it document ALINORM 87/2 which outlined the status of the publication of the Codex Alimentarius. It was noted that Seventeen volumes of food standards and nine volumes of recommended international codes of hygienic and/or technological practice had been published and distributed in English, French and Spanish. It was also noted that some of the texts adopted by the Sixteenth Session of the Commission had not yet been published and distributed, due principally to financial difficulties, but that these texts would become available in 1988.
12. The Commission recalled that, at its Sixteenth Session, it had asked the Secretariat to review the procedures for the distribution of Codex documents including the merits of making the various volumes available as priced publications through FAO and WHO sales agents. The Commission was informed that there were difficulties in proceeding with plans to distribute final Codex texts free of charge to sales agents who would then sell them for a nominal handling charge, although FAO and WHO were seeking solutions to this problem. In any case all working documents, reports of Codex sessions and final Codex documents would continue to be provided to Codex Contact Points, free of charge, as in the past. The Commission expressed the wish that this practice be continued.
13. A number of delegations drew attention to the length of certain reports of Codex Sessions which, in their opinion, were too long and were often accompanied by annexes containing lengthy statements, consultants' reports or reports of Working Parties. Other delegations also drew attention to the late arrival of working papers which meant that delegations were unable to brief themselves adequately before meetings. The Commission noted that the Secretariat and the Chairmen of Codex Committees had already taken steps to make reports as concise as possible while still paying adequate attention to technical and policy considerations, and to incorporate the reports of working parties into the main body of the report wherever feasible. The Commission also noted that the Secretariat had made efforts to ensure that documents for meetings were distributed in all languages in a timely fashion, but that delays in postal, pouch or national distribution after arrival in the country still posed some problems.
PROGRESS REPORT ON COMPUTERIZATION OF CODEX MAXIMUM LIMITS FOR PESTICIDE RESIDUES AND ACCEPTANCES
14. The Commission had before it a brief report by the Secretariat on the above subject (ALINORM 87/5). It noted that a tested computer programme had been developed which was designed to store and process maximum residue limits and their acceptances by Governments and print notifications of acceptances ready for publication in the three working languages of the Commission.
15. The Secretariat hoped that Codex maximum residue limits, reviewed on the basis of the Codex “Classification of Foods and Animal Feeds”, would be computerized in FAO in the near future, together with acceptances received so far, including clarification of a small number of acceptances previously received from Governments. Once the existing information had been computerized, the Secretariat expected to be able to provide information to Governments on acceptances of Codex maximum residue limits, on a more regular basis and also to provide information on acceptances in respect of individual commodities or groups of commodities, of given pesticides or of individual countries.
16. In answer to question, the Secretariat indicated that the FAO main computer could technically provide direct and automated information on acceptances, but that such a service was not yet available at FAO.
17. The Commission noted that the computerization of Codex maximum residue limits and other related information had been done by the Netherlands and that this had greatly facilitated the work of the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues and the efforts of the Secretariat concerning the computerization of acceptances. It thanked the Government of the Netherlands for this assistance and also commended the Secretariat for its efforts in introducing automation into the work of the Commission.
18. The Commission had before it ALINORM 87/2 and ALINORM 87/2-Addendum containing detailed information on acceptances of Codex Standards and Codex Maximum Limits for Pesticide Residues. This document supplemented the information presented to the Sixteenth Session of the Commission and was based on replies received from Argentina, Canada, China, Costa Rica, Cuba, Czechoslovakia, Finland, Guatemala, Hungary, India, Madagascar, Mauritius, Mexico, New Zealand, Norway, Switzerland, Thailand, U.S.A, Venezuela and Zimbabwe. In addition, the Commission was informed that Finland had accepted the Codex Standard for Gluten-Free Foods (CODEX STAN 118-1981) with specified deviations.
19. The delegation of Brazil stated that it had accepted the Maximum Residue Levels for 40 pesticides and the Recommended Code of Practice for Canned Fish. The formal acceptance would be conveyed in due course.
20. The delegation of Switzerland stated that it had recently completed a comparative study of 111 Codex Standards with regulations in force in that country. This report had recently been forwarded to the Secretariat. Unfortunately, not all standards could be accepted due to problems in accepting provisions on food additives, labelling and methods of analysis and sampling.
21. The delegation of Argentina stated that a number of milk product standards had been accepted with specified deviations.
22. The delegation of Thailand stated that Codex Standards were used as a reference point for establishing standards in that country. In particular, the Codex General Standard for Irradiated Foods and Recommended International Code of Practice for the Operation of Radiation Facilities Used for the Treatment of Foods had been applied so as to allow introduction of the process in Thailand. In general, foods conforming to Codex Standards were allowed free entry into Thailand provided that they were in conformity with Thai regulations.
23. The delegation of India stated that the elaboration of national maximum residue levels for pesticides first required that the pesticides be registered under the Pesticides Act and then considered under the Food Law. To date, maximum residue levels for 31 pesticides had been established and those for a further 30 were being studied.
24. The delegation of Cuba provided details on the acceptance of a number of cereals and cheese standards, and noted that these brought to 92 the number of Codex standards accepted by Cuba.
25. The delegation of China stated that it had established Maximum Residue Levels for 16 pesticides in foods.
26. The delegation of Finland stated that it would provide notification of acceptance of a number of Maximum Residue Levels for pesticides in the course of the year.
27. The delegation of the Republic of Korea stated that a study was being carried out by the government on pesticide residue levels in food and agricultural products as well as on heavy metals such as lead, cadmium and mercury in fish and shellfish on the basis of results obtained under the FAO/WHO Food Contamination Monitoring Programme. On this basis, the Republic of Korea was preparing to accept Codex Maximum Residue Levels for Pesticide Residues. Translated Codex publications were being made available to research institutes, food manufacturers and others for their up-to-date information. Furthermore, the government was proceeding with a programme to convert national food standards to the Codex format.
28. The Commission restated that it was important for all members of the Commission to communicate to the Secretariat their position on acceptances, and that if formal acceptance was not possible, then countries should give favourable consideration to notifying the Secretariat that products in conformity with Codex standards would be permitted free entry into and distribution within their territorial jurisdictions. If this presented a problem, then countries should consider notifying the Secretariat that products in conformity with Codex Standards would be allowed entry subject to certain conditions.
29. The Secretariat was requested to give priority to revising and publishing the complete “Summary of Acceptances” (CAC/Acceptances, Parts I and II) so that member countries would be in a position to take positive action with regard to acceptances in the light of the positions taken by others.
30. The Commission had before it ALINORM 87/7 which summarized the FAO/WHO funding of the Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme for the biennia 1984/85, 1986/87 and the proposed budget for 1988/89. In presenting this document, and relevant sections of ALINORMS 87/3 AND 87/4, the Thirty-Third and Thirty-Fourth Executive Committee reports, the FAO/WHO Secretariat pointed out that the Joint Programme funding over the past several years was a zero growth budget which was adequate to cover FAO/WHO operating expenses related to the Programme. The Commission was informed of the continued full support by FAO and WHO, of the Programme as a high priority activity by the Director-General of FAO, Mr. E. Saouma, in his opening statement and by the Secretariat in introducing this item. It was pointed out in ALINORM 87/7 that FAO and WHO share the Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme expenses on 75/25% basis repectively, and that additional FAO contributions to the budget brings total contributions to a ratio of about 80%/20% overall, respectively. The WHO Joint Secretary informed the Session that the WHO 1988/89 budget had been approved by the May 1987 World Health Assembly so that 1988/89 contributions by WHO would continue at the same level unless unexpected serious shortfalls in pledged contributions occurred.
31. In response to a question, the Session was assured that FAO and WHO support to expert committee activities under the budget of the regular programme was scheduled to continue in 1988/89 at a level which should be adequate to support all requests from the Codex Alimentarius Commission or its committees for expert assessment and advice on various topics such as food additives, pesticide residues, veterinary drug residues in foods, or other contaminants.
32. In summarizing the discussions on this agenda item, the Commission noted possible overall budgetary problems the two agencies are facing. However it urged FAO and WHO to continue to give high priority and full funding support to the Codex Alimentarius Commission FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme and to related expert committees and ad hoc consultation advisory mechanisms since the results of such work were of extreme importance to all member countries of the Commission.
REPORT ON ACTIVITIES WITHIN FAO AND WHO COMPLEMENTARY TO THE WORK OF THE COMMISSION
33. The Commission had before it document ALINORM 87/8 which reported on Joint FAO/WHO Activities; FAO Activities; and WHO Activities separately. As agreed during the adoption of the Agenda, item 21(c) International maximum limits for radionuclide contamination of foods had been cancelled, and therefore the Report of the FAO Expert Consultation on Recommended Limits for Radionuclide Contamination of Foods would be discussed first under the present item.
Report on Developments Concerning Radionuclide Contamination of Foods
FAO
34. The FAO Representative provided background on the activities within the Organizations and highlighted the efforts and coordination between major international agencies since the accident at the Chernobyl nuclear facility. He noted that as a result of numerous requests from member countries for assistance, Mr. E. Saouma, FAO Director-General, addressed this matter in his remarks to the World Food Council (June 1986), the 90th FAO Council (November 1986) and the 91st FAO Council; that the Director-General had indicated to these bodies his concern; and that he had requested the Codex Alimentarius Commission to consider the matter. It was pointed out that both the 90th and 91st Sessions of the FAO Council had urged the setting of international agreed standards. In addition the 9th Session of the Committee on Agriculture called upon FAO to establish recommended standards for foods as they relate to contamination with radionuclides. He noted that an FAO Expert Consultation on Recommended Limits for Radionuclide Contamination of Foods, the report of which had been distributed as document ESN/MISC/87/1 to all member countries and Codex Contact points as well as other international organizations, had been discussed by the Nineteenth Session of the Codex Committee on Food Additives. This Committee had recommended consideration of the report by the Commission together with the establishment of a special ad hoc working group of government experts, if necessary, to consider certain technical details of the report. The levels in the report were considered to be interim and applicable to international shipments and not necessarily to food in countries more immediately affected by contamination from an accident. However, in view of recent discussions between FAO and WHO it had been agreed that pending the outcome of current WHO work to establish derived intervention levels for health, the FAO report of the Expert Committee would be submitted to the Commission for information purposes only. FAO appreciated that the limits relating to international trade would have to be considered separately from intervention levels needed to protect consumers in the immediate vicinity of nuclear accidents, or in areas where contamination was high.
35. The Commission was informed that the recommendations of the FAO Expert Consultation report were based on the recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) and that the findings were admittedly conservative but that food protection agencies in several countries have used similar, or even more conservative assumptions in setting radionuclide contamination levels for foods; that in the absence of such guidelines many importing countries were now requiring lot certifications of foods imported as one method of insuring that contaminated foods were not being imported; that there continued to be a problem in many countries in international trade with regard to possible radionuclide contamination of foods, and that FAO continues to receive requests from member countries for assistance. The Commission was informed that FAO was currently involved with the aid of a consultant in preparing a training manual and syllabus for food control officials on sampling techniques and analytical methodology for determining levels of radionuclide contamination of foods and that work in this area would continue. In addition, FAO was considering the possibility of providing necessary laboratory equipment and training to member countries so as to assist the food control officials in carrying out their work.
WHO
36. The WHO Joint Secretary informed the Commission that, following the Chernobyl accident, WHO had also received numerous requests for guidance concerning acceptable levels of radionuclide contamination of food. As a result, and because radionuclide contamination of foods is of health concern, WHO, in collaboration with other international organizations, was now in the process of preparing WHO Guideline Values on Derived Intervention Levels. These would represent levels of radioactivity in food (and possibly other media) below which intervention was not justified. This approach was based on minimizing the health detriment and at the same time ensuring the judicious use of limited resources. The approach took into account not only the cost to society from the health risk, but also from the imposition of counter measures. It was the application to accident situations of the optimization principle developed by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP).
37. The plans for development of these guidelines were proposed in the autumn of 1986 and further discussed during an inter-agency meeting in November 1986 with the participation of IAEA, FAO, The Nuclear Energy Agency of OECD, and EEC, to assure their collaboration. A progress report was submitted to and discussed by WHO's Executive Board in January 1987. The approach for the development of the guideline values had been agreed upon by a WHO Expert Group on Derived Intervention Levels in April 1987 which also prepared a draft of the guideline document. (A summary report on this meeting had been made available to the delegations as WHO document PEP/87.4). This draft of the guideline document had meanwhile been sent to selected Member States in all WHO regions and to International Organizations such as FAO for review and comments. It would be discussed and finalized by a further WHO Expert Group meeting in September 1987 together with the comments received.
38. The matter was also raised by several delegations to the 40th World Health Assembly, May 1987, when the WHO Secretariat was requested to pursue its plans, as described above, and that the matter be further reviewed by WHO's Executive Board at its 81st Session in January 1988.
39. During an FAO/WHO intersecretariat meeting in May 1987 it was agreed that WHO would await the discussions on the subject by its Executive Board, January 1988, and that thereafter there would be a further intersecretariat meeting of the two Organizations in early 1988 to consider further actions to be taken and to agree on a joint approach for making recommendations to Codex concerning radionuclides in food.
IAEA
40. The observer from IAEA pointed out that IAEA has been active for some years in developing standards for safety and radiation protection. Some of these jointly with WHO and FAO and other international organizations. However, it was pointed out that the majority of the work carried out had dealt with primary intervention levels at which counter-measures or protection actions should be introduced. In December 1987 a document “Derived Intervention Levels for Application in Controlling Radiation Doses to the Public in the Event of a Nuclear Accident or Radiological Emergency”, which presents a methodology for obtaining numerical values for derived intervention levels, was published.
41. The Commission was informed that an Advisory Group was convened in February 1987 and reviewed in the light of the Chernobyl experience the entire guidance given by the Agency on intervention levels. The recommendations of the Advisory Group is intended to be published in late 1987. In addition, IAEA is expected to publish by the end of 1988 a complete revision of its documents dealing with derived intervention levels and will try to develop a consistent approach for the very different situations which may prevail: (a) the situation in the immediate vicinity of the accident site; (b) the situation where a country is affected by direct deposition of a radioactive material and (c) the situation where the sole contribution to the radiation doses received within the country is via imported foods.
Need for Action by the Codex Alimentarius Commission
42. The Commission's attention was drawn to ALINORM 87/4, Report of the Thirty-Fourth Session of the Executive Committee of the Codex Alimentarius Commission 25–26 June 1987, para 28 as follows:
43. The Executive Committee recommended that the Commission:
take note of the Report of the FAO Expert Consultation on Recommended Limits of Radionuclide Contamination in Foods;
note that WHO had confirmed that the levels recommended in the FAO report presented no unacceptable hazards to health;
note that the FAO report was available for use by countries as required.
44. Several delegations expressed disappointment that the FAO report would not be considered by the Commission for decision and that a joint FAO/WHO proposal was not available for consideration.
45. Several delegations indicated that the Codex Alimentarius Commission was the official international body that should be responsible for establishing guidelines for levels of radionuclide contamination in foods in international trade.
46. The delegations of Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Egypt, Federal Republic of Germany, Italy, Kenya, Nigeria, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey and USA expressed their appreciation for FAO acting promptly to deal with a very difficult situation and recognized the need to provide guidance and advice to countries, especially as it would relate to trade issues.
47. The delegations of Finland, France and the United Kingdom although appreciating the efforts of FAO, indicated their disagreement with the approach used and the recommendations made in the FAO Expert Consultation. They supported the view that no decision be made on the issue until WHO has issued the recommendations currently in preparation.
48. Several delegations pointed out that the FAO Report could be misunderstood because the experts were listed under the names of their countries. In fact, they were present in their personal capacity and not as official representatives of their country or organization.
49. Several delegations expressed the need that the future work in this area should be coordinated with all involved international agencies, especially the work being conducted by FAO and WHO.
50. The delegation of Australia expressed surprise that the original agenda had been amended and that there would not be a decision made on adopting the FAO report and further suggested that the Commission might consider a resolution to adopt the report as it stands, at least until better guidelines became available. Several delegations requested the Commission to adopt the FAO report, if only on an interim basis.
51. The delegation of Turkey referred to the recently held FAO Inter-governmental Working Group on Tea and explained that the Group had been informed that the FAO Expert Consultation Report made it clear that in the case of diluted beverages such as tea, the levels proposed in the Report applied to the beverage as consumed. The delegation expressed its support for the FAO document, especially as it referred to the first year levels.
52. The delegation of India stated that, in calculating derived intervention levels, the dietary patterns of the developing countries should be taken into account, and the delegation of Egypt expressed its opinion that attention should be paid to the effects of contamination on under-nourished individuals.
53. The Commission agreed that there were no guidelines available for radionuclide contamination of food in international trade except for those provided by FAO, and that there was WHO agreement that the FAO guidelines offered no unacceptable risk to health. However, the Commission expressed disappointment that there had been no joint FAO/WHO proposal available for consideration. The Commission concluded that the FAO report, although not adopted, is readily available for use by countries. The Commission further called for speedy joint action by FAO and WHO in arriving at a joint proposal which could be reviewed by the 35th Session of the Executive Committee of the Commission to be held in mid-1988 and if possible earlier by the Codex Committee on Food Additives or another appropriate committee and for a report on the action taken to be presented to the next session of the Commission.
REPORT ON JOINT FAO/WHO ACTIVITIES
Joint Meeting on Pesticide Residues (JMPR)
54. The FAO Representative informed the Commission that the JMPR had held two sessions since the Commission's last session in 1985 and had evaluated six new compounds and had re-evaluated 93 compounds. For most of these compounds, Maximum Residue Levels (MRLs) and Acceptable Daily Intakes (ADIs) could be estimated and/or re-confirmed. Guideline Levels were recommended for 19 compounds. Following a review of toxicological data the ADIs of 3 compounds were withdrawn in 1985 (captafol, propineb, thiram).
55. Cooperation with the Codex Committee for Pesticide Residues had been excellent. Most of the matters referred to the JMPR by the Committee had been considered by JMPR at the earliest opportunity. Reports and Monographs of the JMPR were published shortly after its sessions and had been made available for further consideration by the Committee at the session immediately following the JMPR.
56. The Joint Meeting in 1986 had considered the question of consumer exposure to pesticide residues in relation to MRLs, in an attempt to facilitate the acceptance of MRLs. It had considered Guidelines on the subject being elaborated by WHO in collaboration with the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues and had recommended that an FAO/WHO meeting of experts be convened to consider further the question of consumer exposure. Both the 1985 and 1986 JMPR sessions had also considered the revised Codex Classification of Foods and Animal Feedstuffs, now fully implemented and used by the JMPR as the basis for commodity descriptions in proposing MRLs. The 1986 JMPR had also considered guidelines on animal studies designed to develop residue data for the establishment of MRLs in foods of animal origin.
Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives
57. The Secretariat informed the Commission that three meetings of the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) had been held since the Commission's last session. Of these, two had been devoted to the evaluation of food additives and contaminants and one was devoted exclusively to the evaluation of residues of some veterinary drugs in foods.
58. In regard to food additives, the Commission noted that 59 substances had been evaluated and specifications for identity and purity were considered for a further 37 substances by the 30th and 31st meetings of JECFA. Antioxidants, enzyme preparations, some natural food colours and other miscellaneous additives were considered. Monosodium glutamate (MSG) had been reviewed in the light of a request from the Codex Committee on Food Additives and a “non-specified” Acceptable Daily Intake allocated. Lead, with special reference to intake by infants and children, and aflatoxins were considered. Reports of the meetings are published in the WHO Technical Report Series. The specifications of identity and purity are published in the FAO Food and Nutrition Paper Series. The toxicological monographs prepared by JECFA are published separately in the WHO Food Additive Series.
Residues of Veterinary Drugs in Foods
59. The Commission was informed about the 32nd Meeting of JECFA which took place in Rome 15–23 June 1987. Following the recommendation of the Codex Committee on Residues of Veterinary Drugs in Food (October 1986) for the provision of independent scientific advice this was the first JECFA meeting devoted exclusively to the safety evaluation of residues of veterinary drugs. The Committee discussed and made recommendations on the following items: (a) Principles and approaches specific to the safety evaluation of veterinary drugs, to be used in future for the submission of data and the assessment of drugs; (b) Criteria and requirements for the analytical methods used in the determination of residues; (c) Evaluation of compounds, suggested as having priority by the Codex Committee on Residues of Veterinary Drugs in Food. No ADI was established for the antibiotic chloramphenicol, and it was recommended that its use should be discontinued; ADIs and acceptable residue limits were established for the xenobiotic growth promoters, trenbolone acetate and zeranol, although both the ADI and the acceptable residue level for trenbolone acetate were temporary. No ADIs were considered necessary for the endogenous growth promoters estradiol-17β, testosterone and progesterone. Their residues should pose no hazard to human health when the drugs are applied in accordance with good animal husbandry practice. The report will be published in the WHO Technical Report Series and summaries of the residue data in the FAO Food and Nutrition Papers. Toxicological monographs on chloramphenicol and the two xenobiotic growth promoters will be published in the WHO Food Additive Series.
60. The Commission recalled that an International Consultative Group on Food Irradiation had been established in 1984 under the auspices of IAEA, FAO and WHO. The objective of this Group was, inter alia, to evaluate global developments in the field of food irradiation and to provide a focal point of advice on the application of food irradiation to Member States and the Organizations. The membership of the Group had grown to 26 countries which donated resources for the implementation of its activities, such as the convening of Task Forces on trade promotion of irradiated food, on the use of irradiation as a quarantine treatment, on marketing/public relations of food irradiation, on assessment of economic feasibility of food irradiation and on the use of irradiation to ensure hygienic quality of food and a Workshop on food irradiation for food control officials. The reports on all but the task force meeting on hygienic quality of food were available from the Food Preservation Section of the Joint FAO/IAEA Division in Vienna, Austria. The report on the task force meeting on the use of irradiation to improve hygienic quality of food was available from the Food Safety Unit of WHO, Geneva.
61. The Commission was also informed of an International Conference on the Acceptance and Control of, and Trade in Irradiated Food, co-sponsored by FAO, IAEA, WHO and ITC-UNCTAD/GATT, which would be held in Geneva from 12–16 December 1988. The aim of the Conference was to establish an internationally agreed document for the acceptance and control of international trade in irradiated foods among Member States. The Secretariat called upon the Codex Contact Points to take an active role in coordinating national activities in preparation for the Conference.
62. The Commission was further informed of the publication, by WHO, of a fact sheet on food irradiation (In Point of Fact: food irradiation) which was available from WHO's Media Service in English and French.
63. Finally, the Commission received a report on the publication of a WHO book on food irradiation, co-sponsored by FAO, which would contain factual information on the process and its benefits and limitations. The book was expected to be available by the end of 1987 or early 1988.
64. The Regional Office for Europe of WHO had convened a Working Group on Health Impact and Control of Irradiated Food, in Neuherberg, Federal Republic of Germany, from 17–21 November 1986. The main objective of this meeting was to bring together researchers from different parts of the world who work on test methods to verify that a given food had or had not been irradiated. The report of this meeting will be available from WHO's Regional Office for Europe in Copenhagen.
Guiding Principles on the Evaluation of Programmes to Ensure Food Safety
65. The above guidelines have been developed by WHO and FAO to assist Member States in programme monitoring and evaluation to assure that the activities undertaken are those which yield substantial results. The guidelines were at present available as a provisional edition, the final edition was expected to be published as a WHO offset publication in early 1988. The Secretariat hoped that Codex Coordinating Committees would find these guidelines useful for their work in relation to monitoring national food safety and food control activities.
Joint FAO/WHO Food Contamination Monitoring Programme
66. The Joint FAO/WHO Food Contamination Monitoring Programme had been established under the Global Environmental Monitoring System (GEMS) of the United Nations Environment Programme to coordinate and stimulate monitoring activities at national, regional and global levels for the early detection and control of pollution in the environment. A description of the Programme's activities was contained in ALINORM 87/8. It was noted that there were at present 26 collaborating centres and 12 participating institutions collaborating in the Programme. The Commission was informed of the work on monitoring levels of certain pesticides, heavy metals and aflatoxins and also the publication of Guidelines for the Study of Dietary Intakes of Chemical Contaminants which had been prepared under the auspices of the Programme. It was noted in particular that the data collected under the Programme were available to the subsidiary bodies of the Commission for use in establishing maximum levels of contaminants in commodity standards. The Commission was informed of the valuable assistance provided by the Governments of Sweden and the United Kingdom and the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) in the provision of reference materials being used in the laboratory quality assurance aspects of the Programme.
67. The commission was informed that a publication entitled “Guidelines for Can Manufacturers and Food Canners”, which was intended to assist food processors in developing countries to control problems of contamination of canned processed foods by lead and tin had been prepared and published in the FAO Food and Nutrition Papers Series.
Joint FAO/WHO Expert Consultation on Food Protection for Urban Consumers, Rome, 1–5 December 1986
68. The main issues addressed by the Consultation concerned the lack of infrastructure at the local level to provide adequate and safe food supply in rapidly expanding urban situations. The need for assistance to local food control agencies from both the international and national authorities had been recommended as one means of improving the situation. The report of the Consultation was expected to be ready for distribution in late 1987.
Second FAO/WHO/UNEP Conference on Mycotoxins
69. The Commission was informed that the first FAO/WHO/UNEP Conference on Mycotoxins was held in Nairobi in 1977 and since that meeting a number of new developments and information had been accomplished in the field of identification and control of mycotoxins. The second conference was scheduled to be held, with the assistance of the Government of Thailand, in Bangkok, Thailand from 28 September - 3 October 1987. All member Governments of FAO and WHO had been invited to participate.
70. The delegation of Norway supported the work of both organizations and recommended that a better means be found to provide information to the Codex Contact Points concerning meetings, conference and other information. The Commission noted with keen interest the joint activities of the two organizations and requested it be kept fully informed on these issues.
71. The Commission was informed of specific activities relating to cooperation with member governments particularly those of developing countries, which were described in detail in Part B of ALINORM 87/8 and which were carried out by the FAO Food Quality and Consumer Protection Group in the Food Quality and Standards Service.
Food Control Assistance to Developing Countries including promotion of coherent national food quality control systems and the organization of national food control strategy workshops remained a high priority. Increased attention was being paid to programmes dealing with export and import certification of food and agriculture products and where applicable Codex Standards were being recommended. It was planned to conduct a short seminar prior to the next Regional Committee for Asia in January 1988 dealing with regional problems associated with export and import of food products.
Food Contamination Surveys and Training in Food Contamination Control were carried out within the overall efforts to strengthen food control systems in developing countries. They also supported the activities of the FAO/WHO Food Contamination Monitoring Programme. Regional activities in Asia and Africa had been supplemented by additional activities in specific developing countries.
Training continued to receive high priority. A regional network of training centres has been established in the Asian Region to strengthen various food inspection activities such as inspection of low acid canned foods. The countries of Canada, France, Netherlands, Sweden and the USA were cited for their excellent cooperation and assistance in providing training to individuals from FAO projects.
Food Control laboratories in several countries had received assistance in strengthening their national capabilities and programme. The Commission's attention was drawn to the Food Laboratory Newsletter which had been developed by the Swedish Food Administration and which was distributed free of charge to developing countries. This publication was cited for the information it contained relating to the work of the Commission, as well as various activities including meetings of FAO and WHO.
Street Foods
FAO has continued supporting activities to determine the types and levels of
contaminants found in street foods which in some countries was the major source of
some of the populations. Work to improve the conditions under which these foods
were being sold is being undertaken. Although these problems appear to be national
rather than international, regional workshops have been held so as to coordinate
these activities regionally.
Radionuclides
The Committee was informed that FAO would continue to recommend to member countries
the use of the limits for radionuclides which had been reviewed by the Expert
Consultation. In addition training, equipment and supplies would be provided where
possible to assist food control officials in member countries to determine if food
products were contaminated and if so at what level. The Commission was informed
that the World Food Programme was now using the FAO Report as its guideline and had
informed their suppliers that future shipment of foods would require a certificate
stating that the shipments do not contain foods with levels of radionuclides above
those recommended by the FAO Consultation. In addition, FAO intended to use the
interim guidelines in training programmes at least until that time when there might
be something available for revising the recommendations. The Commission was
thanked for its comments regarding FAO action taken following the accident and was
advised that FAO would do all possible to arrive at a joint FAO/WHO proposal for
consideration as recommended earlier.
Publications
The Commission was informed regarding the brochure describing the work of the Food
Quality and Consumer Protection Group (ESNSp) that had recently been prepared in
English, French and Spanish and widely distributed. In addition, recent
publication and distribution of manuals concerning food control laboratories had
been accomplished.
International Code of Conduct on the Distribution and Use of Pesticides
Action as outlined in ALINORM 87/8 has been taken to give effect to the International
Code of Conduct on the Distribution and Use of Pesticides which was
unanimously adopted by the FAO Conference in November 1985. This action included
the distribution of the code and technical guidelines in Arabic, Chinese, English,
French and Spanish; collection of baseline data on the current activities;
development of syllabus for a model national training course; technical assistance
to member countries and both regional and sub-regional workshops have been
conducted to harmonize pesticide regulation requirements.
72. The Commission was informed that it would receive a report only on the global WHO activities, implemented by WHO Headquarters. A report on country and regional activities, implemented by WHO's Regional Offices, would be presented to the respective Codex Regional Coordinating Committees.
73. WHO, during the last years, had made considerable efforts to integrate food safety into Primary Health Care (PHC). In this context, the support from food and related industries and from bilateral funding agencies had been received. A first pilot project had been started in the Dominican Republic and a second one in Pakistan was in the pipeline. In support of these efforts, several publications had been or were being prepared such as:
Guide for persons concerned with food safety at PHC level (available 1988);
Examples of health education material on food safety (available late 1987);
International Source List of Audiovisual Material on Food Safety (available);
Guidelines for Safe Food Handling in Hotels, Restaurants and similar Establishments (available late 1987).
74. A WHO Consultation on Health Education in Food Safety was held in Geneva in April 1987 to advise, among others, on the optimal integration of food safety education into PHC particularly, but not exclusively, in developing countries. This consultation had stressed the need for behavioral changes and had called upon all sectors of society (governments, industry, agriculture, commerce, education, mass-media, consumers', women's, youth, religious and rural groups) to commit themselves to mounting long-term campaigns in food safety education. The report of this consultation would be available from the Food Safety Unit, WHO.
75. Recent outbreaks of foodborne listeriosis had caused considerable concern to public health authorities and to the food, particularly dairy, industry. As a consequence, WHO convened in December 1986 a Consultation on Listeriosis which concluded, inter alia, that food products were the major vehicle of transmission of listeriosis to man. The report on this meeting was available from the Veterinary Public Health Unit of WHO.
76. In order to address the specific food safety aspects of the listeriosis problem and to provide guidance to public health authorities and to the food industry as to how to ensure safeguarding the consumer, WHO gave now consideration to the convening of a further working group in early 1988.
77. The International Programme on Chemical Safety continued to produce most useful information which was also of interest to food safety and control personnel. In this context, special reference was made to the Environmental Health Criteria Document series. A listing of titles of particular interest to the above personnel was contained in a list of WHO and Joint FAO/WHO publications and documents which had been made available to the delegations.
78. The Commission was also informed that WHO continued its International Digest of Health Legislation series which contained legal texts and summaries/reviews on national legal actions, including the area of food safety and food control. This publication was also available from WHO.
United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UN/ECE)
79. The UN/ECE observer expressed this Organization's appreciation for the good cooperation which existed between Codex and the UN/ECE within the Joint ECE/Codex Groups of Experts on Standardization of Fruit Juices and Quick Frozen Foods, as well as in other areas of mutual interest. As agreed in the past, Codex standards were routinely taken into account when UN/ECE standards were being elaborated in an effort to ensure that Class II requirements of the commercial ECE standards were equivalent to the Codex minimum requirements. This practice served to emphasize the complementary relationship of UN/ECE and Codex standards. Current UN/ECE activities, as reported in document AGRI/WP.1/R.140*, were briefly summarized. It was reported that the UN/ECE Committee on Agricultural Problems had endorsed the efforts of the Working Party on Standardization of Perishable Produce to establish a new Group of Experts on Standardization of Meat.
80. The Committee and Working Party had also expressed their desire to avoid any duplicating of the responsibilities of UN/ECE and Codex and had requested that the Codex Secretariat ensure that UN/ECE countries be fully involved in any elaboration of international commercial standards for fresh fruits and vegetables, including those of tropical origin. The UN/ECE observer drew attention to Annex II of the document AGRI/WP.1/R.140 which included an agreement for coordination of the programme of work of the Working Party on Standardization of Perishable Produce and Codex which had been approved by the UN/ECE Committee on Agricultural Problems and the Executive Committee of the Codex Alimentarius Commission (ALINORM 85/3, paras. 152–153).
ISO Activities of interest to the Commission
81. The Representative of the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) presented a brief survey of relevant activities of this Organization. He mentioned that a comprehensive report on the work of Technical Committee ISO/TC 34 “Agricultural Food Products” had been prepared by the Hungarian Secretariat and distributed to participants. This report included information on published standards, standards in preparation, the organizational structure of the ISO Technical Committee, as well as on the general policy of ISO with respect to its collaboration with other international organizations, including the Codex Alimentarius Commission. In emphasizing the close working relations which existed between the various sub-committees of ISO/TC 34 and the subsidiary bodies of the Commission, the Representative of ISO assured the participants that his Organization would make every effort possible to avoid duplication of work between the two organizations.
82. He also mentioned the work of the “Inter-Agency Meeting”, a body which acted as an advisory group to the Codex Committee on Methods of Analysis and Sampling. The “Inter-Agency Meeting” comprised representatives of all international or broadly-based regional organizations active in the development and validation of methods of analysis and sampling required by the Commission. The ISO Central Secretariat had assumed the Secretariat function of the “Inter-Agency Meeting” which met regularly in connection with the Codex Committee on Methods of Analysis and Sampling.
83. The Representative of ISO also referred to the work of some other ISO Technical Committees which prepared standards of interest to the Commission, i.e. ISO/TC 93 “Starch (including derivatives and by-products)”, ISO/TC 147 “Water quality”, ISO/TC 47 “Chemistry”, and ISO/TC 54 “Essential oils”.
84. The Commission noted with satisfaction the good collaboration which existed between the two organizations and ISO's efforts to avoid duplication of work.
85. The delegation of Hungary, on behalf of the Secretariat of ISO/TC 34, expressed its appreciation for the support given to this Technical Committee both by the Codex and the ISO Central Secretariat.
PROGRESS REPORT ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CODE OF ETHICS FOR INTERNATIONAL TRADE IN FOOD
86. The Secretariat introduced document ALINORM 87/9 which contained a summary report on statements made by governments in regard to the implementation of the Code of Ethics for International Trade in Food (CAC/RCP/20) through their national food regulations. It was noted that under Article 7 of the Code, governments were responsible for the Code's implementation, and that under Article 10 would be required from time to time to notify the Secretariat of the Codex Alimentarius Commission on actions taken to implement the Code. It was also noted that the Code of Ethics had been amended by the Sixteenth Session of the Commission.
87. It was noted that, since the Sixteenth Session of the Commission, the governments of Benin and the United Kingdom had informed the Secretariat of the Commission of their position regarding the Code of Ethics.
88. The delegation of the Republic of Korea noted that the Code of Ethics had been amended to take into account the WHO Code on the Marketing of Breast-Milk Substitutes, and that the Code of Ethics would be introduced into general practice in this country.
89. The delegation of Argentina noted that the aim of the Code of Ethics was to protect the consumer, and therefore had been reviewed once again by the authorities of that country. Argentinian law had taken up the principles of the Code and there were no problems in implementation.
90. The delegation of China noted that the principles of the Code were reflected in the national law of 1982 on food hygiene. Article 3 of this law contained provisions covering aspects of food production and handling.
91. The delegation of Hungary noted that a national Committee for the Code of Ethics had been established and that a revision of the Food Act was being undertaken which would take the principles of the Code of Ethics into account. The Government hoped to be able to make a statement on its implementation of the Code in the near future.
92. The delegation of the Netherlands stated that there were difficulties with the Code due principally to the nature of the food law in that country. The law, however, was being revised and the philosophy of the Code would be reflected.
93. The delegation of Poland stated that the principles of the Code were the same as in national law.
94. The delegation of India welcomed and supported the use of the Code of Ethics in International Trade but noted that there were certain difficulties in implementing some parts of the Code, especially with regard to maximum levels for pesticide residues which were different in India to those prepared by the Commission.
95. The delegation of Indonesia stated that the Code was of great value and was being reflected and implemented in the national food law. It noted, however, that in regard to exports, the requirements of the importing countries were considered to be most important.
96. The Commission noted the importance of the Code of Ethics in export and import trade and asked the Secretariat to continue its efforts to obtain statements from governments regarding the implementation of the Code. It noted the commitment to the joint goals of consumer protection and the ensuring of fair practices in trade of those countries who had provided information on the implementation of the Code.
97. The Commission agreed to discuss both items together.
98. The secretariat introduced ALINORM 87/10 which summarized the discussions of the FAO Committee on Agriculture meeting on the role of food quality and standards in food security, trade and health. The Commission was informed that the FAO Committee on Agriculture had thoroughly discussed this topic under the Committee's biannual agenda item devoted to nutrition and gave high priority to FAO's work in this area.
99. The FAO Committee on Agriculture stressed the importance of the FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme in removing non-tariff trade barriers to international trade and in promoting consumer protection in the area of both quality and safety. It endorsed the lead role of FAO in assisting countries in strengthening national food control systems and pointed out that improved quality control mechanisms for government institutions and food industry could reduce the large volume of trade problems caused by food contamination and non-compliance with recommended national food standards. The FAO Committee on Agriculture called upon member governments to increase their formal acceptances of Codex standards and contaminant limits and encouraged the Codex Alimentarius Commission to emphasize work on food additives, pesticide residues, food contaminants and food labelling. The FAO Committee on Agriculture gave full support to the following recommendations to governments and FAO:
Governments
recognize the positive impact of an effective food control system on market growth, product acceptability and consumer protection;
ensure that within a national food control system Codex standards, codes of practice, maximum limits for pesticides, etc. are accepted and implemented as fully as possible;
ensure that government food control bodies foster and support improved food handling and quality assurance practices in the food production, processing, distribution and marketing sectors, as well as conducting normal compliance procedures;
encourage and assist food producers and processors to develop adequate quality control practices that assure consistent marketability of food products;
coordinate food control activities among agriculture, trade, health and environmental bodies in order to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of food trade and consumer protection programmes based on a sound strategy for food quality and safety;
develop extension and educational activities to promote food protection and safety for all population groups.
FAO
promote and support food quality and standards as important elements linking food security, trade and health;
maintain continuous support to developing countries for national strategies for quality and safety, food control systems and contamination monitoring programmes;
enhance collaboration with WHO and other agencies to strengthen food quality and standards programmes, including avoidance of duplication of effort and maximizing resource utilization; and
promote enhanced acceptance and implementation of Codex standards, codes of practice, etc. by member governments as essential actions to improve world food security, facilitate trade, and protect consumers;
develop and promote extension and education activities to encourage improved food protection programmes for rural and urban consumers.
100. The Secretariat informed the Commission that the FAO Council, which met in June 1987 and reviewed the report of the Committee on Agriculture, gave strong support to FAO work in this area. It gave high priority to continued work on food contamination, particularly radionuclides in foods and commended the Commission for its valuable work.
101. In discussing this item several delegations complimented the FAO Secretariat on the excellent paper prepared for the Committee on Agriculture and expressed the hope that it would lead to the development of new programmes and strengthen existing activities to better protect consumers and promote trade of good quality and safe foods. The Commission took note of the recommendations of the Committee on Agriculture and expressed its desire for continued adequate financial support for the FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme and FAO work in food quality and standards.
102. Introducing document ALINORM 87/16 on the discussion of the work of the Codex Alimentarius Commission by the WHO Executive Board and the world Health Assembly, the WHO Joint Secretary informed the Commission that, at the request of a member of the WHO Executive Board, the Director-General of WHO had prepared a paper on the Codex Alimentarius Commission for consideration by the Executive Board during its 79th Session in January 1987. Several members of the Executive Board recognized the important role of the Codex Alimentarius Commission for the promotion of food safety and the facilitation of international food trade and commended the Director-General for its support to the work of the Codex Alimentarius Commission. In conclusion, the Executive Board recommended to the 40th World Health Assembly the adoption of a resolution on the Codex Alimentarius Commission. During its 40th Session, May 1987, the Assembly reviewed this resolution. Several delegations spoke and again highlighted the contribution of the Codex Alimentarius Commission for food safety and thus for health promotion and disease prevention and the 40th World Health Assembly adopted the resolution (Appendix IV).
103. In discussing these items the Commission recognized the importance of the support received from the governing bodies of FAO and WHO and accepted the recommendations of action made by both of them. It encouraged governments to inform all potential users of Codex documents about the information contained in them, and stressed the need for governments to promote the use of Codex standards in international trade
FUTURE DIRECTION OF WORK OF THE JOINT FAO/WHO FOOD STANDARDS PROGRAMME
104. The Commission had before it a paper prepared by Mr. G.O. Kermode, WHO Consultant, which had been presented to the Eighth Session of the Codex Committee on General Principles (CX/GP 86/10). It also had available the following opinions on this paper:
the 33rd Session of the Executive Committee (ALINORM 87/3, paras 137–142)
the 8th Session of the Committee on General Principles (ALINORM 87/33, paras 57–66)
the 6th Session of the Coordinating Committee for Latin America and the Caribbean (ALINORM 87/36, paras 151–156)
the delegation of Finland (LIM 13)
the delegation of the Netherlands (LIM 16)
105. The Commission noted that one of the principal issue for discussion was the proposed establishment of a Committee to deal specifically with environmental contaminants.
106. The delegation of Finland, drew attention to the opinion of the Executive Committee which had twice stated that environmental contaminants should be accorded a high priority by the Commission. Without in any way wishing to express dissatisfaction with the work of the Codex Committee on Food Additives, the responsibility of which included environmental contaminants (Procedural Manual, 6th Edition, page 78), the Finnish Delegation supported the establishment of a separate Committee on Food Contaminants citing the heavy workload in regard to food additives which remained an important field of activity and which prevented due attention being paid to environmental contaminants. Also because the significance of food contaminants as health hazard and therefore as a potential barrier to trade was increasing, the Finnish Delegation stated that a clear separation of food additives and food contaminants would be beneficial for all parties concerned. The delegation stated that the Finnish Government had offered to host a Codex Committee on Environmental Contaminants, should the Commission agree to establish such a Committee.
107. The delegations of Argentina, Kenya, Kuwait, Norway, Republic of Korea, Sweden, Switzerland, Tanzania and the United Kingdom spoke in favour of the proposal to establish a new committee. Several of these delegations pointed out the need to maintain a clear separation between food additives, which were intentionally added to food, and contaminants, which were unintentionally present. They stressed that equal importance should be given to the consideration of contaminants and the consideration of additives.
108. The delegations of the Federal Republic of Germany and Sweden suggested that, if no new committee was to be established, then the work of the Codex Committee on Food Additives should be divided into two parts; one for additives and one for contaminants.
109. The delegation of the Netherlands stated that a Committee on Environmental Contaminants should only be established if the work could not be dealt with efficiently by existing committees, which did not appear the case. It noted that substantial progress had been made in considering the endorsement of contaminant provisions in Codex standards; the consideration of substances migrating from plastic packaging materials; the consideration of the establishment of guideline levels for mercury in fish; and in establishing levels for aflatoxins. It also noted that certain aspects of work relating to food additives was equally applicable to contaminants, especially consideration of the toxicological evaluations made by the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives and the study of dietary intakes.
110. The delegations of Belgium, Canada, China, Egypt, France, Federal Republic of Germany, India, Japan, Kuwait, Poland, Spain, Switzerland and USA, generally supported the opinion of the Netherlands or else felt that to propose the establishment of a new Committee at the present time would be premature. Several of these delegations mentioned the need to coordinate and concentrate programmes of work and avoid potential duplication.
111. The Commission agreed that there was no need to establish a new Committee at this time. It requested the Codex Committee on Food Additives to take into account the present discussion and to make the necessary changes which would respond to some of the concerns expressed. It also agreed that the name of the Committee should be changed to “Codex Committee on Food Additives and Contaminants”, but noted that neither of these two decisions would be with prejudice to future discussions concerning the separation of the two activities. It also noted that some contaminants, for example PCB's, would continue to be dealt with by the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues.
112. The Commission expressed its sincere appreciation to the Government of Finland for its generous offer to host a Committee on Environmental Contaminants and the commitment of Finland to further the work of the Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme.
(b) Consideration of improved working arrangements
113. The commission endorsed the proposal of the Coordinating Committee for Latin America and the Caribbean to improve the working mechanisms of the Commission through the development of a description of the programme of work of the Codex Alimentarius Commission. This would facilitate participation in the work of the Commission by indicating details of ongoing activities. The Secretariat was requested to prepare a summary of the Commission's work following each session of the Commission in consultation with the Chairman of the individual Codex committees, to keep this list up-to-date and to distribute it to Contact Points on a regular basis.
114. The Commission also requested the Secretariat to consider the preparation of a summary of policy decisions taken over the past 25 years which had not been included in the Procedural Manual. It was recommended that such a summary, in the form of a manual, should be considered by the next session of the Committee on General Principles.
115. The delegation of the United Kingdom referred to a paper for the 8th Session of the Committee on General Principles and enquired whether action had been taken on the proposal to establish a Joint Expert Committee on Nutrients to advise on Recommended Daily Allowances for vitamins and minerals (RDA's) for labelling purposes and other specific nutritional matters of interest to Codex.
116. The Commission was informed that the Committee on Food for Special Dietary Uses had, at its 15th Session, confirmed the need to revise the RDA's presently included in the Codex Guidelines on Nutrition Labelling which were considered by a number of delegations as not being suitable for the expression of micronutrients in the declaration of nutrients on the label. The Committee had requested the two parent organizations to give urgent consideration to convening a joint expert consultation or to establishing a new expert committee. It was noted that the Committee on Food Labelling had fully supported these views.
117. The Commission noted that this request had been conveyed to the two organizations and that the committees concerned would be kept informed of further developments.
118. The Commission noted that other matters concerning the future direction of the Programme of Work would be discussed in conjunction with the report of the Eighth Session of the Committee on General Principles (see para 146).
REPORT ON CASE STUDIES CONCERNING THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF CODEX WORK ON TWO SELECTED MEMBER COUNTRIES
119. The Commission had before it reports on the economic impact of Codex work on two selected member countries; Brazil (ALINORM 87/11, Part I and Appendix) and USA (ALINORM 87/11, Part II and Appendix). The reports were introduced by the Secretariat which noted that the proposal for developing such case studies had arisen during the sessions of the Inter-American Conference on Food Protection, held in Washington DC, in August 1985. Both reports highlighted the usefulness of applying Codex standards to commodities moving in international trade.
120. The delegation of Brazil expressed its appreciation of the initiative of the Secretariat in undertaking the case studies and stated that they were worthwhile documents and a beneficial guiding tool for countries which wished to undertake similar studies. The delegation noted, nevertheless, that the government had not been consulted in the preparation of the Brazilian case study. The delegation reserved the right to express a full opinion at a later date, as the document had only been received two weeks before the opening of the Commission's present session.
121. The Commission noted the reports and opinion of the Executive Committee that the reports showed the need for countries to accept and use Codex standards in order to realize fully the benefits of participation in the Commission's work. They also showed how the impact of Codex work could be evaluated and what future actions might be envisaged at the national level. The Commission expressed satisfaction at the generally positive conclusions in the reports and proposed that they might be combined and presented as an information document for use by governments. The Commission encouraged delegations to forward comments on these documents to the Secretariat.
INFORMATION BOOKLET ON CODEX WORK
122. The Chairman introduced the newly-published information booklet entitled “Introducing Codex”, copies of which were distributed to delegations in limited quantities. The booklet describes, in layman's terms, the impact of Codex work on economic developement and trade, and for the consumer.
123. The delegation of New Zealand, endorsing the efforts of the Secretariat to make the work of Codex more widely known, proposed that a suitable theme for the a future “World Food Day” would be “Food Quality and Standards”. The delegation of Canada stressed the importance of including items on the work of the Codex Alimentarius Commission in the food science and technology curricula of higher educational institutes.
124. The Commission expressed its wish that governments and the Secretariat should distribute the booklet to industries and consumer groups, and make it available to schools, universities and libraries. It was noted that the French and Spanish versions of the booklet were in preparation.
125. The Commission had before it ALINORM 87/35 containing the Report of an Ad hoc Intergovernmental Consultation held in Mexico City to examine the need for International Standards for Tropical Fresh Fruits and Vegetables.
126. Introducing the Report, the delegation of Mexico informed the Commission that an extensive survey on international trade in tropical fresh fruits and vegetables had been carried out prior to the Consultation and expressed the view that establishment of a new Codex Committee on Tropical Fresh Fruits and Vegetables as recommended by the Consultation would result in increased export of commodities from developing countries and would have a significant impact on the economy of those countries. Further there would be considerable improvement in the quality standards for the products.
127. The observer for UN/ECE, introducing Conference Room Document LIM 4, reminded the Commission of the long experience of the ECE Working Party on Standardization of Perishable Produce in the harmonization of commercial standards for fresh fruits and vegetables based on the Geneva Protocol and on a generally agreed standard layout. The ECE Region, being by far the most important market for internationally traded fresh tropical produce (with about 80 percent of world imports) would obviously be interested in the commercial standardization of such produce. Replies to a questionnaire sent out to delegations of the ECE Working Party revealed that they were not in favour of establishing a new Codex Committee for Standardization of Tropical Fresh Fruits and Vegetables that would work independently of the UN/ECE Working Party. Similar views were expressed by the European Union of Wholesalers of Fresh Fruits and Vegetables (CIMO). The observer requested that, if the new Codex Committee is formed, ways and means should be considered to achieve a smooth and operative cooperation with the ECE Working Party on Standardization of Perishable Produce for the benefit of consumers, producers and traders of fresh tropical produce and cited the Codex UNECE Group of Experts on Fruit Juices as an illustration of the practical possibilities. The observer of the OECD offered the fullest cooperation of his organization with the new Codex Committee if set up, but expressed the view that the responsibilities of each of the organizations should be spelt out.
128. The delegation of Thailand shared the views of USA as expressed in para 49 of ALINORM 87/35 that more thought should be given to the question of a need for establishing a new Codex Committee as recommended by the Consultation. It held the view that duplication of efforts should be avoided and that if a new Committee is established it should cooperate with UN/ECE and OECD. A number of delegations questioned the real need for establishing a new Committee and expressed the view that the objective of the new Committee could be achieved by the existing bodies. They also considered that the standardization of fresh tropical fruits and vegetables would be more efficiently covered by extending the terms of reference of UN/ECE.
129. The delegations of Argentina, Brazil, Cuba and France supported the establishment of a new Codex Committee for the standardization of tropical fruits and vegetables, since in their view the growth in consumption and international trade of this produce necessitated its standardization. Careful thought should, however, be paid to the avoidance of duplication of work and to the close cooperation of the new Committee if established with the UN/ECE and OECD which are already active in the field of standardization of fresh fruits and vegetables. Moreover, consideration should be given to the fact that the standards for fresh fruits and vegetables that would be elaborated by the new Committee would be quality standards which are entirely different from Codex standards which are mainly for prepackaged foods which have traditional provisions for food additives, hygiene requirements and methods of analysis. Establishment of a Joint Codex/ECE Committee as an alternative was also proposed.
130. The Commission recognized the urgent need for quality standards for fresh tropical fruits and vegetables and agreed to establish a new Codex Committee for Standardization of Tropical Fresh Fruits and Vegetables in Mexico City with the understanding that efforts will be made to avoid duplication of work and that the new Committee will work in close collaboration with UN/ECE and OECD.
131. The Commission agreed to the following terms of reference for the new Committee:
to elaborate world wide standards and codes of practice as may be appropriate for tropical fresh fruits and vegetables which are grown exclusively in tropical zones;
to consult with the UN/ECE Working Party on Standardization of Perishable Produce in the elaboration of world wide standards and codes of practice with particular regard to ensuring that there is no duplication of standards or codes of practice and that they follow the same board format;
to consult as necessary with other international organizations which are active in the area of standardization of fresh fruits and vegetables.
132. The Commission accepted the generous offer of the Government of Mexico to provide the Chairmanship of the new Committee under Rule IX.1(a). The Commission noted with pleasure that this would be the first Committee to be hosted by the Government of a developing country.
CODEX COMMITTEE ON GENERAL PRINCIPLES
133. The Commission had before it the Report of the 8th Session of the Codex Committee on General Principles (ALINORM 87/33). The report was introduced by the Chairman of the Committee, Professor J. Bernier (France). Following a general introduction of the conclusions of the Committee, the Commission proceeded to discuss the Report under the following general headings:
Acceptance and Review of Codex Standards and other Texts
134. The Commission noted the difficulties developing countries experienced in giving full acceptance to Codex standards in view of lack of adequate infrastructures for the application of the recommendations of the Commission. It agreed with the Codex Committee on General Principles that FAO and WHO should continue to give attention to this problem.
135. The Commission concurred with the view of the Codex Committee on General Principles that the number of acceptances of Codex standards received was not an appropriate measure of the success of the work of Codex, since Codex standards and other Codex recommendations were being used extensively by governments and traders alike.
136. The Commission agreed to discuss these two related topics together. The observer for the EEC gave an outline of discussions between the Secretariats of the Codex and of the EEC Commissions concerning the matter of the EEC giving formal acceptance to Codex standards. He recalled that the EEC had, in the past, notified the Codex Secretariat on existing situations in the EEC concerning the application of the Codex standards for fruit juices and nectars and maximum limits for pesticide residues. This was done following attempts to notify formal acceptance of the Codex standards for sugars. The observer for the EEC informed the Commission that the EEC had considered in detail the proposal of the Codex Committee on General Principles to amend the Codex Procedures for the Elaboration of Codex Standards which would have the effect of referring Codex standards to International Organizations to which competence in the matter of acceptance of Codex standards had been transferred by the member states. It had been found that the procedure as proposed still did not allow the Community as such to formally accept Codex standards. The EEC would, therefore, continue to indicate the conditions under which products could be traded within the EEC rather than the acceptance of Codex standards (i.e. give an indication of the “free distribution” where possible). The observer for the EEC then gave information concerning differences between Codex standards and EEC directives on labelling, chocolate products, jams, marmalades and fruit jellies and maximum residue limits.
137. On the subject of the role of observers at Codex session, the observer for the EEC stated that EEC observers at Codex session spoke on behalf of the EEC, except that occasionally they spoke on a personal basis on certain technical issues.
138. The Commission endorsed the conclusions of the Codex Committee on General Principles and of the FAO and WHO Legal counsels concerning the role of observers at Codex meetings (see para 54 and 56, ALINORM 87/33). It also agreed that the question of acceptance by regional economic groupings of states should be reconsidered by the Codex Committee on General Principles which should work out a suitable amendment in consultation with the EEC for submission to the next session of the Commission. The EEC was encouraged to consider Codex recommendations favourably in order to facilitate the distribution of food conforming with Codex standards.
Acceptance of Codex Methods of Analysis
139. The Commission noted that the Codex Committees on Methods of Analysis and Sampling and General Principles had agreed on a text describing the obligations which a country assumes in accepting the various types of Codex methods of analysis included in Codex standards (see Appendix IV, ALINORM 87/33, para 22). The Commission endorsed the recommendations concerning methods of analysis.
140. In discussing this topic the Commission noted that there were three issues involved: (a) urging governments to use the General Standard as a basis for their national legislation and to keep difference to an absolute minimum especially those of detail or minutiae; (b) requesting governments to indicate, when notifying acceptance of the standard, any provisions concerning the presentation of mandatory information on the label not covered by the Codex General Standard and (c) the introduction of a footnote to the Scope of the Codex General Standard, requesting governments to indicate such additional provisions.
141. The Commission endorsed the recommendations of the Codex Committee on General Principles as contained in paras 47 to 49 of ALINORM 87/33. The Commission noted that these three issues were covered in the Revised Guidelines prepared by the Codex Committee on General Principles concerning the acceptance of Codex standards (see Appendix IV, ALINORM 87/33 paras. 19–21) and that, therefore, this matter would be rediscussed.
Guidelines for Acceptance of Codex Standards
142. The Commission noted that the revised Guidelines for Acceptance of Codex Standards had been prepared by the Secretariat on the basis of a text considered by the Codex Committee on General Principles and a number of points agreed by that Committee to be included in the Revised Guidelines by the Secretariat (Appendix III, ALINORM 87/33). While endorsing the Revised Guidelines, the Commission agreed that they should be sent to governments for comments and that the Codex Committee on General Principles should reconsider them on the basis of comments received and resubmit them to the Commission.
143. The Commission noted the views of the Codex Committee on General Principles that there was no need for changes in the Acceptance Procedures of the Commission.
Review of Codex Standards, Codes, Maximum Residue Limits and Other Recommendations
144. The Commission noted that there was a need to keep under review Codex standards and other texts to ensure that they reflect current technological and scientific practices and also reflect more closely current regulatory situations in the various countries. It also noted that this represented a significant task both for the national and Codex secretariats and also for governments and interested International Organizations.
145. The Commission agreed with the conclusions of the Codex Committee on General Principles concerning the review of Codex standards etc. and that there was no need to set up an “Omnibus” Committee (see paras 38, 39 and 66(iii), ALINORM 87/33).
Future Direction of the Work of the Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme
146. The Chairman of the Codex Committee on General Principles, Professor J. Bernier gave a detailed account of the discussions concerning future work in that Committee. The Commission noted the conclusions of the Codex Committee on General Principles concerning the need for giving greater emphasis to horizontal committees (labelling, food additives, etc.), rather than the standardization of new food commodities; revision of Codex standards and Codes of Hygienic Practices, including street-vended foods; the creation of a new Coordinating Committee for the Middle East; the separation of the Codex Committee on Methods of Analysis and Sampling into two committees; and the need to pay due attention to the needs of developing countries which are given in para 66 of the Report of the Codex Committee on General Principles. The Commission concurred with the views of the Committee and also noted that the questions relating to contaminants, nutritional considerations and strengthening the working procedures of the Commission had been dealt with under other items of its agenda (see paras 104–118).
Holding of Working Group Sessions
147. The delegation of Sweden referred to discussions on this question in the Codex Committee on General Principles (see paras 75–78, ALINORM 87/33). The delegation expressed the view that, while working groups might be useful in facilitating the work of Codex Committees, they were not always necessary. Furthermore, the use of working groups created problems especially if they were not held at the same place or at the same time as the Codex session. Delegations consisting of one person were placed at a disadvantage and the absence of interpretation also caused difficulties. The delegation requested that the Commission should ask the Secretariat to consider the problem concerning working groups since a number of these appeared to be quasi sub-committees rather than ad hoc arrangements intended to facilitate the work of Codex Committees.
148. The Commission noted the above remarks and the conclusions of the Codex Committee on General Principles and agreed that the Secretariat, in consultation with the Chairmen of Codex Committees, should review the question of the use of working groups at Codex sessions so that they would be in accordance with the Rules of the Commission.
Composition of the Executive Committee
149. On a proposal from its Chairman, the Commission also requested the Committee on General Principles to consider composition and procedures of the Executive Committee, especially with regard to regional representation.
150. The Commission confirmed, under Rule IX.10, that the Committee on General Principles should continue to be under the Chairmanship of the Government of France.
CODEX COMMITTEE ON PESTICIDE RESIDUES
151. The Commission had before it the Reports of the 18th and 19th Sessions of the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues (CCPR) (ALINORM 87/24 and 24A). It also had before it draft maximum residue limits (MRLs) from both sessions at steps 5 and 8 of the procedure included in Addendum 1 to ALINORM 87/24A. In addition it considered document ALINORM 87/38 Part VI and a Conference Room Document (LIM 3) containing observations from governments on MRLs at step 8 and at step 5, where the omission of steps 6 and 7 had been recommended by the Committee. Finally, the Commission had before it a Conference Room Document (LIM 1) summarizing proposed amendments to Codex MRLs.
152. The Reports of the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues and the various working documents mentioned above were introduced by the Chairman of the Committee, Ir. A.J. Pieters (The Netherlands). He gave a general account of the work of the Committee's last two session indicating the sustained interest of governments in work on pesticide residues. He stressed the close cooperation between the Committee and the Joint FAO/WHO Meeting on Pesticide Residues (JMPR) and the positive effect which early issue of the documents arising from JMPR sessions had on progress. The Committee had discussed many sensitive issues and had attempted to keep abreast of developments by a continuous process of revision of its recommendations. In order to promote more acceptances of Codex MRLs the Committee had developed guidelines on regulatory practices and was taking other steps in this regard such as giving additional attention to Good Agricultural Practices, through the holding of a half-day seminar during the next session of the Committee. The Committee was also giving due attention to the question of pesticide residue intake and was developing guidelines, together with WHO in this connection. The holding of an FAO/WHO Consultation to consider this matter further had been recommended. Finally Ir. Pieters drew the Commission's attention to the output of the Committee in the form of over 2000 Codex MRLs and a set of useful publications on various related topics.
153. The Commission noted the above remarks and requested the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues to ensure that the following recommendations of the Codex Committee on General Principles directed to it and the JMPR be given full consideration:
consider how guidelines might be developed in order to encourage the development of good agricultural practices which would ensure that residues at harvest, in foods to be offered for sale, would be the lowest possible leading to the lowest possible legal limits;
fully consider health aspects for the consumer when setting Codex MRLs, bearing in mind the requirements of good agricultural practice in various regions and in an endeavour to secure the maximum number of acceptance by governments;
consider the significance of food commodities in international trade before setting Codex MRLs and also their importance for dietary intakes of residues by the consumer; and
to consider whether further advice, additional to that contained in the “Recommended National Regulatory Practices” (CAC/PR 9-1985) should be developed in order to assist governments in implementing Codex recommendations on pesticide residues.
Draft MRLs at Steps 5 and 8 of the Procedure
154. The Commission agreed to consider all draft MRLs and proposed amendments to Codex MRLs at Steps 5 and 8 together, on the basis of document ALINORM 87/24A Add. 1. It also agreed to consider only those MRLs on which written comments had been received.
047. Inorganic Bromide
155. The Commission noted that residues arising from the use of pesticides containing bromine would be re-evaluated by the JMPR in 1988. The Commission decided to advance the MRLs to Step 6 of the Procedure.
100. Methamidophos
156. The Commission noted reservations by Sweden concerning the high values of most of the MRLs in relation to the ADI and the suggestion of the Netherlands that this pesticide be considered together with acephate, of which methamidophos was a metabolite. It agreed to return the draft MRLs to Step 7 so that the Committee could rediscuss them together with the draft MRLs for acephate.
103. Phosmet
157. The Commission noted the comments from Sweden that certain MRLs were too high in relation to the ADI. Noting that this had been discussed by the Committee it decided to advance the draft MRLs forward in the Codex Procedure and to omit Steps 6 and 7 for a number of draft MRLs. The delegation of Sweden reserved its position concerning this decision.
120. Permethrin
158. The Commission noted the comments of the Netherlands that the MRL of 10 mg/kg for head lettuce represented a compromise which was neither acceptable to those countries which required higher than 10 mg/kg or to countries where less than the proposed figure was considered sufficient. It was noted that this question was due to widely diverging Good Agricultural Practices which should be resolved by the Committee. The Commission decided to return all draft MRLs for permethrin at Step 8 to Step 7 and to advance those at Step 5 to Step 6.
All other Draft MRLs at Steps 5 and 8
159. As no written comments had been received on these MRLs, the Commission agreed that they should be advanced in the Codex Step Procedure, as indicated in document ALINORM 87/24A Add. 1.
160. The delegation of the Federal Republic of Germany made a general reservation indicating that time between the last session of the Committee and the present session of the Commission had been too short to enable the Federal Republic to consider the draft MRLs in sufficient detail. Furthermore, the Federal Republic had certain objections to some of the MRLs either on toxicological ground or in relation to Good Agricultural Practice considerations. These comments had been previously submitted in writing to the Committee.
161. The delegation of Spain indicated its satisfaction with the Committee having adopted certain MRLs for chlorfenvinphos and fenitrothion required by Spanish agriculture. However it considered the proposed MRL of 20 mg/kg captan for kiwi fruit excessive. (Note by the Secretariat: the 1987 session of the Committee had withdrawn this proposed limit).
Proposed Amendments to Codex MRLs
162. The Commission discussed Room Document LIM 1 containing proposed changes to Codex Maximum Limits considered by the Committee to be non-substantial and proposals to withdraw Codex MRLs as a consequence of the withdrawal of the respective ADIs, changes in Good Agricultural Practices or for other reasons. The Commission adopted all the changes included in Room Document LIM 1 with the following corrections:
the Codex MRL for trichlorfon in bananas (pulp) should not be deleted;
the Codex MRL for azinphos methyl for almond hulls should be deleted;
the commodity description “raisins, sultanas, currants (dried products)” for propargite should be changed to “dried grapes (currants, sultanas and raisins)”.
The Commission also noted that the temporary ADI for folpet, which had been withdrawn by the 1982 JMPR, had been reinstated by the 1986 JMPR until 1988. In view of the fact that folpet was still on the agenda of the JMPR, the Commission decided not to take any further action on folpet.
163. The Commission considered a question, raised at its 16th Session, by the delegation of India, relating to the need for providing information on the identity and levels of pesticide residues in exported foods, in order to facilitate the analysis of imported food products. The Commission noted that this matter had been considered in detail both by the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues, and the Codex Committee on Food Labelling and by the 34th Session of the Executive Committee (see paras 48 to 51, ALINORM 87/4). The Commission was informed that the recommendations of the Executive Committee would apply equally to developing countries exporting food commodities and could cause difficulties in trade for these countries.
164. The Commission therefore agreed with the view of the Executive Committee that Coordinating Committees should be asked to consider the question further in the light of paragraphs 50 and 51 of the Report of the Executive Committee. The Commission wished to be informed of further developments.
165. The Commission expressed its appreciation to the Government of the Netherlands for its support of the Commission's work on pesticide residues. The Commission confirmed under Rule IX.10 that the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues should continue to be under the Chairmanship of the Government of the Netherlands.
CODEX COMMITTEE ON RESIDUES OF VETERINARY DRUGS IN FOODS
166. The report of the First Session of the Committee (ALINORM 87/31) was introduced by the Rapporteur Dr. A. Somogyi (Federal Republic of Germany) on behalf of the Chairman of the Committee, Dr. L.M. Crawford (U.S.A.). Professor Somogyi expressed satisfaction that 31 countries and 10 international organizations had participated at the meeting and had enabled the Committee to establish its programme of work, aided by the excellent facilities provided by the Host Government.
167. The Commission noted that the Committee had taken decisions on a number of fundamental issues as follows:
proposals to amend the terms of reference
adoption of definitions for “veterinary drug” and “residues of veterinary drugs”
establishment of criteria for the selection of veterinary drugs for evaluation
priority list of veterinary drugs
agreement on working arrangements with other Codex Committees and the Joint Expert Committee
establishment of a working group on methods of analysis and sampling.
168. The Committee had also agreed to look into the monitoring of dietary intakes, a code for the use of veterinary drugs, and regulatory aspects related to residues of veterinary drugs in foods as the need arose.
169. The Commission was informed that the countries from the African Region had drawn attention to the specific problems of these countries with animal husbandry and consequentially veterinary drugs. The Committee had, therefore, placed trypanocides on its priority list and had strongly supported a request that FAO and WHO should consider holding seminars or workshops to assist African countries to resolve their problems. The Commission fully supported the request of the Committee; and expressed its appreciation for the steps taken by the Committee and encouraged it to continue to take into account regional concerns.
170. The Commission was informed that, in response to the request of the First Session of the Committee to hold a second session in the biennium 1986/87 in order to deal with the urgent matters before the Committee, the Host Country and the Secretariat had agreed that such a session should be convened. The Commission approved holding this session from 30 November to 4 December 1987.
171. The agenda will include the following items:
Summary report of the 32nd Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA)
Procedures for the elaboration and implementation of Codex Residue levels
Glossary of Terms
Good Veterinary Practice
Survey of dietary intake studies
Review of Priority List
Code of Practice for Use of Veterinary Drugs in food producing animals
172. The Observer of the EEC repeated the position of EEC on the use of hormones, that is meat with residues of hormonal growth promoters, presently determined on the final product, may not be traded within and imported into the EEC countries. Consideration should be given to the general philosophy of the control of veterinary drug residues.
173. The Delegation of the United States expressed strong disagreement with the EEC Observer's statement that hormones were banned in member states. The delegation stated several reasons for these views.
(i) Proposed Amendments to the Terms of Reference of the Committee Clause (b)
174. The Committee considered at great length the type of residue level which should be elaborated and adopted by the Commission. It agreed that the MRL concept followed by the Committee on Pesticide Residues was not suitable for veterinary drugs and that health considerations should have a determining impact on the residue levels. The Committee proposed a new term “acceptable residue level” pending further advice by JECFA. The Commission decided that this term could lead to confusion, especially with the concept of ADI and that the Codex residue levels should include a notion of a maximum limit. The Commission did not agree to amend clause (b).
Clause (d)
175. The Commission agreed with the view of the Committee that it was the appropriate body to develop methods of analysis and sampling for the determination of residues of veterinary drugs in foods and that, similar to pesticide residues, it was not necessary to submit these methods to the Committee on Methods of Analysis and Sampling for endorsement. The Commission approved the amendment to clause (d) of the terms of reference.
176. The Delegation of Argentina informed the Commission that it had participated at the Working Group on Methods of Analysis and Sampling.
(ii) Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Residues of Veterinary Drugs
177. The Commission strongly supported the request of the Committee that FAO and WHO should explore every possible means to establish such a committee. If such an action could not be taken at the present time, special session of JECFA should be convened as an interim measure, to deal exclusively with the evaluation of veterinary drugs.
178. The delegation of India drew attention to the need to take into account the WHO recommendations on banning certain drugs in human medicine for public health reasons, when evaluating residues of the same drugs for veterinary purposes. It was agreed that this matter should be brought to the attention of the Committee as well as JECFA.
Confirmation of Chairmanship of the Committee
179. The Commission confirmed under Rule IX.10 that the Codex Committee on Residues of Veterinary Drugs in Foods should continue to be under the Chairmanship of the Government of the USA.
CODEX COMMITTEE ON FOOD LABELLING
180. The Commission had before it ALINORM 87/22, the Report of the 19th Session of the Committee. In introducing the Report, Mr. R.H. McKay of Canada, the Chairman of the Committee, observed that the emphasis of the current work programme of the Committee was shifting towards revision and endorsement of labelling provisions in standards as a consequence of the acceptance of the revised General Standard for the Labelling of Prepackaged Foods.
181. To alleviate the enormous workload, the Chairman had proposed to the 34th Session of the Executive Committee amendments to and recommendations on format and endorsement of labelling provisions. He expressed his satisfaction with the decision of the Executive Committee that the national and the Codex secretariats should examine the proposals and prepare a paper on the matter for the 35th Session of the Executive Committee.
182. The Commission was informed that the Committee had pursued the revision of the General Guidelines on Claims. It had also taken up comments on advertising as instructed by the 16th Session of the Commission. The Committee had also decided that the Guidelines on Claims should be an independent document and not be considered an appendix to the General Labelling Standard. Comments at Step 3 were being requested on the revised text of the guidelines.
183. The Commission noted a statement from the delegation of India that a Code for advertising should be developed.
184. The Commission was also informed of the Committee's appreciation to the Committee on General Principles for adding a footnote to the Scope Section of the General Labelling Standard as a means of resolving a long standing issue on trade barriers created by the existence of national labelling provisions additional to the General Labelling Standard. The footnote had already been included in the Second Edition of Volume VI of the Codex Alimentarius.
185. The Chairman presented a detailed report on endorsements of individual labelling provisions which had made it necessary to take fundamental decisions on such matters as the labelling of irradiated foods and of non-retail containers.
186. The Commission noted the endorsements and agreed with the request by the Committee that care should be taken to incorporate into the standards the changes made by the Committee.
187. The Commission was informed that the Working Group on Methods of Analysis in Nutrition Labelling was continuing its work, and that the Committee was strongly supporting the request to FAO/WHO to convene an Expert Consultation on Recommended Daily Allowances for labelling purposes.
188. The Commission was also informed that the International Consultative Group on Food Irradiation of FAO/WHO/IAEA had submitted proposals for the amendment of Section 5.2 of the General Labelling Standard, dealing with irradiated foods, which will be discussed in detail at the next session of the Committee having regard to comments thereon.
189. Future work included a summary paper on the interrelationship of different labelling documents which have been developed during the last twenty years.
190. The Commission commended the Committee and its Chairman for their excellent work.
191. Referring to other labelling issues, the delegation of Argentina reiterated that in its country the declaration of the country of origin was mandatory.
192. The delegation of Kuwait drew attention to certain trade practices, such as less restrictive date marking of foods for exports and the occurrence of organoleptic inferior products which were not of the same quality as similar products sold in the exporting country. The Commission stated that countries should observe the Code of Ethics which contained specific requirements on the quality of foods for exports. The delegation of Egypt expressed the view that the date of manufacture should always be declared.
193. The delegation of Switzerland reiterated that it could not agree with para 173 of the report concerning the country of origin for cheeses.
