9. In introducing the reports of the Thirty First and Thirty Second Sessions of the Executive Committee contained in documents ALINORM 85/3 and ALINORM 85/4, 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. The Chairman invited the delegations present to give particular attention to the views of the Executive Committee on (i) the topic of future direction of the work of the Programme, (ii) the question of the establishment of a Codex Committee on Residues of Veterinary Drugs in Food, and (iii) the issue of the name of the product where there is substitution of animal protein with vegetable protein.
10. 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 seven more countries had become members of the Commission, bringing the current membership to 129 countries. The seven new members were the People's Republic of China, Haiti, Lesotho, Mozambique, the Seychelles, Suriname and Zimbabwe. The Commission expressed the hope that these countries would find Codex work of value.
11. The Commission requested the Secretariat to intensify its efforts to increase membership and to stress the benefits of participation in Codex work.
12. The Secretariat reported orally on this topic. Volumes II to XV of the Codex Alimentarius had now been distributed in the three languages of the Commission, English, French and Spanish. Volume XVI (Milk Products) had been printed in English and would be distributed as soon as possible after the current session of the Commission. It was the aim to have the French and Spanish versions of Volume XVI available in good time for the next session of the Joint FAO/WHO Committee of Government Experts on the Code of Principles concerning Milk and Milk Products. Volume XVII (Contaminants) had now been printed in English, French and Spanish and would be distributed as soon as possible after the present session of the Commission. Volume I would need to cover certain matters likely to emerge from the present session of the Commission and it was hoped to have this Volume available by the end of the year.
13. All of the codes of practice adopted by the Commission had now been issued in English, French and Spanish.
14. The Summary of Acceptances, Part I - Worldwide and Regional Codex Standards (CAC/ Acceptances, Part I - Rev. 3), which showed, in detail, the position concerning all acceptances of Codex standards up to 3 December 1984 was available in English and would be distributed as soon as possible after the present session of the Commission (a limited number of copies were available to delegates at the current session). The French and Spanish versions of this publication were in the course of preparation.
15. The Secretariat drew the attention of the Commission to the recommendation of the Thirty Second Session of the Executive Committee that the Secretariat should review its distribution arrangements and report on progress to the next session of the Executive Committee. The Secretariat informed the Commission that it would probably be necessary to decentralize the distribution arrangements, in order to make the Codex standards, codes of practice, etc. more easily and readily available to all users, including regulatory authorities, industry and other interested parties.
16. The Commission requested the Secretariat to give urgent attention to determining how best to make Codex Standards, codes of practice, etc. available easily and readily to all potential users. The Commission also requested the Secretariat to consider, in its review of the existing distribution arrangements, the merits of making the various volumes of the Codex Alimentarius priced publications, which they are not at present. The Commission noted that a progress report on this subject would be presented to the Thirty Third Session of the Executive Committee.
17. The Secretariat informed the Commission that it had received suggestions from two countries as to how the issue of amendments to Codex standards might be improved. The Secretariat indicated that these suggestions would receive the fullest consideration.
18. The Commission had before it document ALINORM 85/2 which contained information on replies received from countries since 1 February 1983 up to shortly before the current session of the Commission. As regards Codex standards the replies came from Argentina, Bahamas, Bahrain, Brazil, Cameroon, Canada, Chad, Cuba, Cyprus, Dominican Republic, Ethiopia, Finland, Fiji, Ghana, Equatorial Guinea, Hungary, Iceland, Israel, Ivory Coast, Japan, Kenya, Malawi, Mauritius, Mexico, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Rwanda, Tanzania, Thailand, Uruguay and Yugoslavia. As regards the Codex maximum limits for pesticide residues, the replies came from Bolivia, Canada, Chad, Chile, Guyana, Iceland, Ivory Coast, Mauritius, Sweden, Tanzania, Thailand and Yugoslavia.
19. In addition to the information contained in ALINORM 85/2, the Secretariat informed the Commission that further replies had been received from Canada, Cuba, Czechoslovakia, Mexico and Norway. Canada had notified Revised Acceptance with Specified Deviations in respect of three cheese standards and Acceptance with Specified Deviations for a fourth cheese standard. Cuba had notified Full Acceptance of the standards for Dextrose Monohydrate and Glucose Syrup and Acceptance with Specified Deviations of the Standards for White Sugar, Powdered Sugar and Lactose. Czechoslovakia had notified Limited Acceptance and a number of Full Acceptances for certain maximum limits for pesticide residues. Mexico had also notified Limited Acceptance of certain maximum limits for pesticide residues. Norway had notified free distribution or free distribution subject to certain specified conditions for standards for Sugars and Fats and Oils.
20. The Secretariat informed the Commission of discussions which had taken place between the EEC and Codex Secretariats in December 1984, with a view to encouraging a wider degree of acceptance or implementation by the EEC of Codex standards. Following on these discussions a letter had been sent by the Director-General of FAO to the President of the Commission of the European Communities proposing certain courses of action for consideration, with a view to increased acceptance by the EEC of Codex standards and Codex maximum limits for pesticide residues.
21. The Secretariat also informed the Commission that the Coordinating Committee for Europe, at its last session, had decided to embark upon a pilot study in the hope of promoting more acceptances in the European region. The Coordinating Committee for Europe had agreed that countries in the European region should be asked to study three Codex Standards (Cooked Cured Ham, Canned Tropical Fruit Salad and Edible Arachis Oil) and report back to the next session of the Coordinating Committee on any difficulties they had in accepting these standards.
22. The Secretariat also reported on the work being done by Hungary on the comparison of Codex standards and CMEA (Council for Mutual Economic Assistance) standards.
23. The delegation of Iraq indicated that in Iraq the Codex standards were used as a guide by the regulatory authorities and by the food industry. There were some difficulties in accepting the Codex maximum limits for pesticide residues due to lack of technical personnel in this field.
24. The delegation of Cuba stated that in recent months Cuba had made an additional major effort to accept more Codex standards. Twenty one standards, twenty three codes of practice, four lists of additives and contaminants and six series of maximum limits for pesticide residues had been found acceptable by Cuba, as well as many maximum limits for pesticide residues. The delegation of Cuba referred to the information already supplied in document ALINORM 85/2.
25. The delegation of the Ivory Coast considered the work of the CAC to be very important and the Codex Standards to be useful points of reference. The Ivory Coast hoped to be able to notify acceptances in due course and stressed the need for trading partners to accept standards.
26. The delegation of Thailand stated that the Codex standards were used as a basis in developing Thai food legislation. The standards also served as guidelines for the food industry. Thailand considered that there was a need for more countries to accept the Codex standards. Some Codex standards contained too much detail. More importing countries should accept the standards to facilitate trade. Thailand also thought that the codes of practice were very important.
27. The delegation of France considered that the question of acceptance of the Codex standards and maximum limits for pesticide residues should be considered in depth by the Codex Committee on General Principles at its next session, which France was prepared to host in November 1986.
28. The delegation of Guinea stated that Guinea had no national food standards and that Guinea, therefore, applied the Codex standards. The delegation of Guinea stated that there was a need for assistance and training in regard to methods of analysis.
29. The delegation of Switzerland stated that in Switzerland formal acceptance meant the introduction of new legislation or modification of existing legislation. This presented a difficulty for some countries. The delegation of Switzerland considered that the influence of Codex standards and maximum limits for pesticide residues was much greater than reflected in the Summaries of Acceptances. Switzerland hoped, in the near future, to be able to notify the Secretariat of some positive developments.
30. The delegation of India stated that 54 standards had been drawn up in India for fruit and vegetable products, including juices. For 40 of these commodities the Codex standards were followed. The Codex provisions on contaminants had been followed, but there had been slight modifications as regards styles. The delegation stated that many countries were asking India to supply in accordance with Codex standards. The Codex General Standard for Irradiated Foods was being looked at in India. India was also looking to the Codex Alimentarius Commission for a standard for asceptic packaging of foods.
31. The delegation of Kenya stated that Codex standards and maximum limits for pesticide residues had been used as a basis for developing regulations in Kenya. Referring to Acceptance with Specified Deviations, the delegation of Kenya stressed that it should be borne in mind that deviations were the opposite of harmonization. The extent of the deviations would need to be analysed. The delegation thought it regrettable that some countries had not responded at all as yet on the subject of acceptances.
32. The delegation of New Zealand considered that there was a need for those countries which had been active in Codex work from the beginning to give a lead to others in the matter of acceptances. New Zealand now gave Full Acceptance to the standard for Whey Cheeses and Quick Frozen French Fried Potatoes and Acceptance with Specified Deviations to three cheese standards.
33. The delegation of Norway stated that the introduction of the concept of free distribution greatly helped the situation, because it was now possible to respond positively without introducing new national regulations.
34. The delegation of Argentina stated that certain chapters of the Argentine Food Code were being brought up-to-date. Codex standards were being used as a model in this exercise. Argentina was presently looking at the international cheese standards. Argentina attached great importance to the Codex standards.
35. The delegation of Mexico stated that the Codex standards were being studied in Mexico. Limited Acceptance had been given by Mexico to a certain number of Codex maximum limits for pesticide residues. Mexico hoped to be able to notify further acceptances before the next session of the Commission.
36. The delegation of Malaysia stated that although Malaysia had not yet accepted any Codex standards, still they were used as points of reference in the preparation of national food legislation. A Malaysian National Codex Committee was going to be established. The delegation of Malaysia considered that the developed countries should do more to accept the Codex standards.
37. The delegation of the Republic of Korea stated that the Codex standards and codes of practice were used in the development of national food law in the Republic of Korea. All Codex standards were going to be translated into Korean to increase awareness of Codex work. The question of acceptance of Codex standards and maximum limits for pesticide residues was being studied.
38. The delegation of the Federal Republic of Germany associated itself with the view which had been expressed by the delegation of Switzerland. The delegation of the Federal Republic of Germany stated that formal acceptance of the standards would lead to a vast amount of new legislation, at a time when there was a tendency to limit legislation to the minimum. The delegation thought that the acceptance provisions needed to be looked at, including possibly clause (b) of Full Acceptance in regard to Codex Commodity Standards. The delegation considered that the free circulation concept was one that was particularly useful as an alternative to formal acceptance.
39. The delegation of Ghana stated that Ghana had now decided to give Full Acceptance to the Codex standard for Edible Low Erucic Acid Rapeseed Oil instead of Target Acceptance. The delegation expressed disappointment that the developed countries had not accepted more Codex standards.
40. The observer from the European Economic Community stated that the Codex/EEC intersecretariat discussions which had taken place in Brussels in December 1984 had been very useful. The observer expressed the hope that such contacts would continue. The observer stated that the letter which had been sent by the Director-General of FAO to the President of the Commission of the European Communities had been welcomed and that a substantive reply would be sent as soon as possible. It was the intention of the European Economic Community to do everything possible to deal positively with the suggestions contained in the Director-General's letter.
41. The observer from the Council of Europe gave a brief outline of the Council's work in the area of pesticides. The Council of Europe had published the 6th edition of its brochure on pesticides, which took into account recommendations published by FAO and the EEC.
42. The Commission agreed that it was important for all members of the Commission to communicate to the Secretariat their position on acceptances. Every member country was requested to submit a report in writing on this topic for the Seventeenth Session of the Commission.
43. The Commission agreed that it would be good for the Codex Committee on General Principles to examine problems associated with acceptance of Codex Standards and maximum limits for pesticide residues at its next session. The Commission stressed that this exercise should not result in any slowing down of acceptances.
44. The Commission noted that there was increased use of Codex standards by member countries of the CAC in trade, regulatory activities and food control systems. The Commission decided to place on record the desire of developing countries that developed countries should do more to accept or otherwise implement the Codex standards, in order to help the trade of developing countries.
45. The Commission had before it document ALINORM 85/5 which was introduced by the Secretariat. The Commission noted that this paper had been reviewed by the Executive Committee at its 32nd Session (ALINORM 85/4, paras, 5–11). The Secretariat indicated to the Commission that it was expected that the Commission's programme of activities would be fully carried out within the budget ceiling for 1984/85. As regards the budgetary proposals for 1986/87, the Secretariat indicated that the overall level of the budget would be the same in real terms as that for 1984/85. The pattern of the proposed budget for 1986/87 was very similar to that for 1984/85 except that the provision for consultants had been increased to enable computer services to be made available. An increase had been provided for in the allocation for meetings, in order to provide for a session of the Joint FAO/WHO Committee of Government Experts on the Code of Principles concerning Milk and Milk Products in 1986. A small increase had also been provided for in the allocation for duty travel. The above increases were being provided for by a corresponding decrease in the provision for external translation and printing.
46. The delegation of Spain expressed concern that the reduction in the allocation for external translation and printing in 1986/87 might adversely affect the provision of Codex documents in Spanish. The Secretariat pointed out that the total allocation (without cost increases) for documents (internal and external translation and printing) in 1986/87 was $1 058 000. The Secretariat stated that requirements for 1986/87 had already been costed and that the decrease of $53 000 in the allocation for documentation would not result in any diminution of the established pattern of distribution of documents in Spanish. The delegation of Cuba associated itself with the concern which had been expressed by Spain, but like the delegation of Spain, the Cuban delegation was pleased to learn that the above-mentioned adjustments in the budget would not adversely affect documentation in Spanish.
47. The delegations of Spain and France stated, respectively, that sometimes documents in Spanish and French were received rather late. The Secretariat explained some of the reasons for this and undertook to see what could be done to improve matters.
48. The delegation of USA stated that it supported the proposed budget for 1986/87, and that it was important to maintain in operation all the Codex General Subject Committees. The delegation of the USA also stressed the importance of timely distribution of Codex documents.
49. Mr. C. Sandstrom, Chief, Budget, WHO stated that the budgetary proposals for the Programme for 1986/87 had been approved by the World Health Assembly. On the FAO side, the Commission noted that the budgetary proposals for 1986/87 would be before the next FAO Conference for approval in November 1985.
