114. The Commission had before it document ALINORM 85/39 which had been prepared by WHO in response to a request made by the Executive Committee during its 31st Session (see ALINORM 85/3, paras 154 to 158). In introducing this paper, Dr. Kaferstein of WHO pointed out that the paper attempted to identify some precise actions which could be taken or initiated by the Commission in order to help implement Primary Health Care (PHC).
115. An International Conference held in Alma-Ata, USSR in 1978 had concluded that the goal of WHO and its Member States - Health for All by the Year 2000 - could be achieved only through the improvement and expansion of PHC. PHC consisted of several components, one of which was the promotion of (safe) food supply and proper nutrition and emphasized the need for joint action at the level of the individual, the family and the community. A Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Safety (Geneva, 1983; WHO TRS No. 705, 1984) had recommended that food safety should be considered as an integral part of the PHC delivery system. This recommendation had to be seen in the light of the following facts: (i) food safety programmes in developed countries, as commonly carried out (e.g. through official food control) had failed to reduce the incidence of foodborne disease and (ii) in developing countries only a very small proportion of food was subject to any form of control, be it for health or for trade reasons. It was therefore obvious that the following actions were needed to respond to the recommendation of the Expert Committee on Food Safety:
education of consumers;
training of food handlers and of people working with the community (e.g. community workers, nurses, agricultural extension workers and others);
development of appropriate technologies; and
intersectoral coordination.
116. The Commission was reminded that the Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC) was, after all, implementing a food standards programme and not a food safety programme, but that notwithstanding this, the CAC had certain outputs and established mechanisms which could help implement some of these necessary actions (see para 115 above) which are needed for the integration of food safety into the PHC delivery system. The paper under consideration had therefore made several proposals to this effect such as:
In addition to the efforts made by the Commission and its Secretariat to help increase the acceptance, or implementation of Codex standards and MRLs by Member States, special effort should be made to draw attention to the valuable advice available in the Codes of Hygienic Practice published in Volumes A to H in the Codex Alimentarius concerning the hygienic handling, storage and distribution of food. These Codes may also be useful as additional training material in food safety for community health workers, agricultural extension workers, home economists, nutritionists and similar staff working with the community who need a knowledge of the basic principles of food safety in order to be able to work with families and/or small food processors to improve the hygiene and nutritional quality of food and to reduce food losses.
Government and NGOs (including the food industry) should be encouraged to translate at least selected parts of the Codex Alimentarius into their national languages in order for Codex texts to find their way to small industries and communities.
The Secretariat should be requested to produce appropriate information material on the CAC, in conjunction with the information services of FAO and WHO.
The Directors-General of FAO and WHO might wish to report, from time to time, to their Governing Bodies, the FAO Conference and the World Health Assembly, on those activities of the CAC which are complementary to the promotion of Health For All/2000 and Agriculture towards 2000, in order for these Governing Bodies to better implement the work of CAC.
The Coordinating Committees of the CAC should be invited to consider the feasibility of introducing on their agenda a permanent item dealing with monitoring of national policies, programmes, services and institutions related to food safety and food control in order to stimulate action at the national level leading to increased technical cooperation activities in food safety between Member States themselves and between Member States, FAO and WHO.
The Regional Offices of WHO and FAO should be requested to associate other relevant meetings, such as food safety workshops and seminars, by appropriate timing and venue, with sessions of Regional Coordinating Committees to improve the technical, scientific and practical experience shared among participants.
Invitations to Regional Coordinating Committees should be sent by the Secretariat not only to Ministries of Agriculture and Health but also to a wider range of international or regional governmental and non-governmental organizations concerned. Such wide participation would help to spread information on how to avoid and manage food hazards and on the need for a sufficient and safe diet.
The Coordinating Committees should be invited to further discuss at their forthcoming sessions the possibilities to integrate food safety into the primary health care delivery system at the national level.
117. During the discussion of this topic, several delegations made the point that it was now also the time for Member States to put the valuable advice contained in the Codex Alimentarius into public health practice. For this purpose, a plea was again made concerning the urgent need for more ready availability of Codex texts. The delegation of the Federal Republic of Germany informed the Commission that the standards, codes of practice, methods of analysis and sampling, lists of food additives and pesticide residues had been translated into German by a private person and were available as priced publications.
118. The delegation of Canada suggested that Codex Contact Points thoroughly familiarize themselves with Codex documentation to ensure that appropriate distribution takes place. As an example of the value of Codex publications, the delegation reported that some 10 000 copies of the Codes of Hygienic Practice had been distributed throughout the country and formed the basis for interpreting good manufacturing practice. The delegation also suggested that consideration be given to shortening Codex reports in the interests of better utilization and understanding. However, it was felt that guidelines for National Codex Committees regarding the use of Codex documentation might be useful.
119. The delegation of Norway referred to the need for simplification of Codex texts and supported strongly the idea of reports at suitable intervals to the Governing Bodies of FAO and WHO.
120. The delegation of Kenya made reference to a Resolution on Food Safety and Health, adopted by the Regional Coordinating Committee for Africa at its 6th Session, but felt that it was unlikely that Member States had taken steps to implement this Resolution. The delegation called upon developing countries to act and felt that regular monitoring at sessions of the Coordinating Committees of national policies, programmes, services and institutions related to food safety and food control would be a strong stimulus for national action.
121. The observer from the International Organization of Consumer Unions (IOCU) spoke in support of the recommendations contained in the paper under consideration. It was felt that national consumer unions can make an important contribution for the improvement of food safety especially in the field of consumer education.
122. The Chief of the Food Standards Programme informed the Commission that it had been proposed that the FAO Committee on Agriculture, during its session in 1987, would discuss the role of food quality and standards for food security, health and trade. This would offer a unique opportunity to give visibility to the Food Standards Programme and other activities of FAO and WHO in these areas. Concerning the proposal to translate Codex texts into national languages he felt that what was needed at the national level was a simplified leaflet illustrating in a practical manner the provisions of Codex texts. In summing up, the Chairman said that obviously there were significant limitations to what the CAC could do to help in the implementation of PHC. He thought that such action lay more in the field of FAO and WHO. The Chairman considered that the proposals contained in the paper under consideration were worthwhile and should be acted upon in the Regional Coordinating Committees. The Commission agreed with those views.
123. The Commission agreed that the suggestions contained in document ALINORM 85/40 should be brought to the attention of the Codex Committee on General Principles at its next session.
124. The Commission had before it ALINORM 85/41 setting out replies to a questionnaire which had been issued by the Secretariat regarding the use of Codex of Practice/Hygienic Practice.
125. The Commission noted that the subject had already been discussed by the Executive Committee at its 32nd Session (see ALINORM 85/4, paras. 47–56).
126. In discussing the future work programme of the Commission at its 31st Session, the Executive Committee had stressed the need for an intensified campaign for the acceptance, implementation and utilization of Codex standards and had also noted the importance of Codes of Practice and in particular Codes of Hygienic Practice in furthering the goal of protecting the health of the consumers.
127. The Commission noted that to date more than 30 Codes had so far been elaborated and others were in progress. The more recent ones and those under revision took into account the hazard analysis critical control point (HACCP) approach.
128. Unlike Codex Standards, Codex Codes were voluntary texts and were not subject to acceptance. It was therefore difficult to assess the results of the intended purpose, that is to assist governments to ensure that foods were prepared under conditions of good manufacturing practice, in particular under sound hygienic conditions and to facilitate international trade.
129. The Commission noted that the Executive Committee had, therefore, “agreed that it would be appropriate to obtain information on how the Codes of Practice are used in Member Countries” (ALINORM 85/3, para. 162).
130. In CL 1985/11 February 1985 governments had been invited to supply information on the ways in which the Codex Codes of Practice were used in their countries both by regulatory authorities and by industry.
131. The Executive Committee had learnt that replies were received from Argentina, Cuba, Greece, Ireland, New Zealand, Netherlands, Norway and Thailand which, in general, showed that countries attached great importance to the Codes of Practice/Hygienic Practice for use in industry, by government regulatory authorities and in the drafting of new laws on foods. Some countries were translating the Codes into their national languages before using them as instructions to Quality Control Services and Industry and, in some cases, countries had indicated that a large number of Codes were fully acceptable.
132. The Executive Committee had expressed its satisfaction with the positive reaction of governments to the usefulness of Codex Codes of Practice/Hygienic Practice in their countries. It was, however, regretted that comparatively few countries had so far replied to the Circular Letter.
133. The Executive Committee had further recommended that reports on the utilization of the Codes be regularly reviewed through the Regional Coordinating Committees and requested, in particular, that countries be encouraged to make some case studies on the effect of the Codes on improving their commodity distribution systems.
134. The delegation of Mexico informed the Commission that many of the Codes were of great interest, particularly those concerning meat and meat products: it was considered that all codes were invaluable reference documents and to a great extent their texts were reflected in the food legislation of the country.
135. The delegation of the USA stated that the Codes were widely used in the voluntary fish inspection services in the USA to improve processing efficiency and quality control. They were also of great service in adapting US Federal Regulations in the interests of international harmonization of food regulations as, for instance, processed meat products.
136. The Commission agreed that the codes of practice were valuable sources of information both to the developed and developing countries. The Commission agreed with the suggestion of the Executive Committee that countries be encouraged to embark upon some case studies on the effect of the Codes on improving their commodity distribution systems. Reports on the utilization of the Codes should be reviewed by the Regional Coordinating Committees.
137. The Commission had before it document ALINORM 85/42, which had been prepared by the Secretariat, with the object of assessing the current and likely future workloads of all Codex Committees, to enable an opinion to be formed as to how many more sessions of each Codex Committee it would be reasonable to envisage. In introducing the document, the Secretariat pointed out that it was basically an information document. The Secretariat stated that, in its view and for the reasons given in the paper, the work of the Codex General Subject Committees and the Codex Regional Coordinating Committees could be regarded as ongoing. It also appeared to the Secretariat that, on the basis of their current workloads some Codex Commodity Committees might be able to adjourn sine die after one or two more sessions (for details see ALINORM 85/42). The Secretariat also informed the Commission that the United Kingdom had agreed to hold one more session of the Codex Committee on Fats and Oils.
138. The delegation of the Federal Republic of Germany, host country for the Codex Committee on Meat, proposed that this Committee, which had last met in 1973, be dissolved. In the light of the decision to establish a new Codex Committee - the Codex Committee on Residues of Veterinary Drugs in Foods - the dissolution of the Codex Committee on Meat would mean that there was no overall increase in the number of Codex Committees. The Commission accepted the proposal of the delegation of the Federal Republic of Germany and decided to dissolve the Codex Committee on Meat.
139. The Commission had before it document ALINORM 85/17, which was introduced by the observer from the IDF. He referred to the Commission's decision, at its Fifteenth Session in 1983, that a further meeting of the Joint FAO/WHO Committee of Government Experts on the Code of Principles concerning Milk and Milk Products could be held in 1986 to enable the Committee to complete work still outstanding, following which the Committee would be expected to adjourn sine die. The observer from the IDF referred to changing technology and the need for revision of standards to avoid their becoming out-of-date. IDF was working on proposals to up-date certain standards and it was unlikely that this work could be completed in one session. There was also a need for codes of practice and guidelines in the dairy sector, for the benefit of developing countries (details were set out in document ALINORM 85/17). In addition, new standards were needed for a number of milk products which were becoming increasingly important in international trade and of special interest to developing countries. In the circumstances, the observer from the IDF requested the Commission to reconsider its decision that the Committee should adjourn sine die after its 1986 session. He proposed that the Committee should meet at least every four years.
140. The delegations of Norway, USA, Ireland, United Kingdom, Netherlands, Sweden, Switzerland, Finland, Finland, Kenya, France, Spain and Canada supported the request of the observer from the IDF that the Committee should not be adjourned sine die after its 1986 session. The majority of these delegations agreed with a proposal of the delegation of the United Kingdom that rather than meet every four years, the Committee should meet only when there was a real need in terms of work to be done.
141. The delegation of Australia was opposed to the proposal of the IDF. The delegation of Australia stated that continued sessions of the Milk Committee would be an undue burden on the budget of the Programme. The delegation of Australia thought that future sessions (after the 1986 session) of the Milk Committee should be held only if a country could be found to host the Committee.
142. The delegation of New Zealand stated that New Zealand had supported the Milk Committee since its inception. However, New Zealand thought that it should adjourn when it had completed its workload. The delegation of New Zealand thought that the question of whether there should be a further session after 1986 should be a matter for decision by the Commission.
143. Concerning the matter of budgetary support for sessions of the Milk Committee after 1986, the Secretariat informed the Commission that it would be possible to provide for a session of the Committee in every second biennium.
145. The Commission had before it document ALINORM 85/46 which was introduced by the Secretariat. The Commission also had before it the views of the Executive Committee on this topic, as contained in the reports of its 31st and 32nd Sessions (ALINORM 85/3) and ALINORM 85/4).
146. The Commission noted that, at its Tenth Session in 1974, when discussing this topic it had come to the conclusion that “the feasibility of introducing a Codex mark or symbol was very doubtful, and that as any advantages that might be derived therefrom would be largely outweighted by the difficulties, this subject should not be pursued” (ALINORM 85/46, para. 2). The Commission also noted that at the 31st Session of the Executive Committee, a WHO consultant, who was the author of a new paper on this topic (see ALINORM 85/46, para. 1) had come to the conclusion that the position taken by the Commission at its Tenth Session “remained largely valid today” (ALINORM 85/46, para. 3). The author had gone on to state in his paper that “as the organizations are not themselves in a position to act as certifying bodies, this would mean that such certification would have to be exercised at the national level, based on the technical requirements of the Codex” (ALINORM 85/46, para. 4). Following on this, the author raised the possibility of the CAC developing guidelines or codes of practice on this subject, which might be of use to member countries.
147. The Commission further noted that the Executive Committee at its 31st Session had “decided to request the Secretariat to issue a circular letter to governments asking them whether they thought there was a need for a certification system, whether such a system should be an international one or a national one, and what matters should be covered in the certificates to be issued” (ALINORM 85/46, para. 5). The Commission noted that replies had been received from only five countries and that all but one had considered that the establishment of a certification and inspection system was unnecessary and not feasible.
148. The Commission agreed not to pursue this topic.
149. The Commission noted the views of the Executive Committee as contained in the Reports of its Thirty First and Thirty Second Sessions (ALINORM 85/3 and ALINORM 85/4) and the written views of Ireland, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland and Thailand as contained in ALINORM 85/38.
150. The Chairman invited delegations to give their views on medium and long-term future activities of the Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme. The Chairman noted that membership of the Codex Alimentarius Commission was still increasing and that countries which had not yet become members of the Commission would be encouraged to do so. He also noted that the Secretariat was trying to identify sources of funding, to enable increased participation of developing countries at sessions of Codex Regional Coordinating Committees.
151. The Chairman informed the Commission that it had been proposed that the FAO Committee on Agriculture should, at its forthcoming session, have on its agenda the role of food quality control and standards in food security, health and trade.
152. The delegation of Kenya proposed that FAO, WHO and UNDP should find resources to enable governments to install the necessary laboratory and training facilities to implement standards. Provisions on food additives and pesticide residues were particularly difficult to control.
153. The Chairman reminded the Commission that requests for such resources must come from member governments and that they have to be addressed through the country representatives of the Organizations. The matter may also need to be raised in the Governing Bodies of FAO and WHO and with UNDP.
154. The delegation of Canada thought that an action plan for making Codex technical documents better known was needed. The delegation stated that the Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme had issued some of the finest technical material at present available, but that this was often not reaching interested audiences.
155. The delegation of Cuba recalled that possible improvements to the working mechanisms of the Commission had been discussed at the Fourth Session of the Coordinating Committee for Latin America and the Caribbean. The basic proposals were to establish a technical programme for the Commission and its subsidiary bodies in the short, medium and long-terms: consideration of mechanisms for participation by developing countries in subsidiary bodies; mechanisms for accepting Codex documents: technical assistance to developing countries; the elaboration of guidelines for more effective participation in Codex Committees and the preparation of much clearer terms of reference for the work of the Regional Coordinating Committees than those currently in effect. The delegation of Cuba recalled that the Coordinator for Latin America and the Caribbean had also spoken on the topic at the Thirty Second Session of the Executive Committee, indicating that these problems would be considered at the next meeting of the Codex Committee on General Principles.
156. The delegation of Mexico made several proposals related to the preparation of an annual programme of work and information on past and future activities of Codex Committees. The delegation also thought that an annual directory should be issued listing Codex Contact Points, auxiliary bodies and national and international bodies whose activities were related to Codex work and that an updated list of Codex documents should be issued bi-monthly. The delegation also apoke of the need to establish concrete assistance programmes between the developed and developing country members of the Commission and the need for regional and sub-regional and other bodies working in fields related to Codex work to allocate technical and financial support for seminars, training courses, workshops, etc. on specific topics of interest to be held in conjunction with Codex meetings. Mention was also made of the advisability of establishing as in other international standardizing bodies, an auxiliary body to deal with the problems and specific needs of the developing countries.
157. The delegation of Sweden pointed out that implementation and enforcement of standards was the responsibility of member countries and that inter-country exchange of information on Codex activities should be encouraged. The delegation thought that continued evaluation of Codex work was very important. The delegation also thought that there should be a continuous evaluation by member countries of their activities along the lines discussed in the report of the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Safety. The delegation supported the proposed role of the Codex Committee on General Principles in the promotion and implementation of Codex standards. The Regional Coordinating Committees also had an important role to play in promoting acceptance of the Codex standards.
158. The delegation of Guinea enquired whether Codex had undertaken any work on alcoholic beverages and mineral waters. The delegation was informed that no work had been undertaken on alcoholic beverages, but that a European Regional Standard had been developed for natural mineral waters.
159. The delegation of the United Kingdom thought that there was a danger that Codex standards could become outdated because of rapid advances in food technology. It was likely that in the future, instead of fixed compositional standards, more emphasis would be placed on more informative labelling. The delegation thought that over the next few years, Codex standards might require revision to provide more precise labelling provisions. Another topic that would grow in importance in the coming years was nutrition - both in developed and developing countries. The delegation thought that the CAC should see to what extent it could increase its role in promoting better nutrition. The delegation noted that the Codex Committee on Foods for Special Dietary Uses had already been given a certain mandate in the area of nutritional considerations in Codex work.
160. The delegation of India stated that to implement Codex standards it would be necessary to find ways and means to provide proper training and equipment. Also it would be desirable to try and simplify the standards.
161. In summing up, the Chairman stated that some useful ideas and suggestions had emerged from the discussions regarding the future work programme, its organization and implementation and that these should receive careful consideration. The CAC should always be ready for changes that would make it more effective. Keeping in view the Commission's mandate, member countries were requested to submit further views in writing to the Secretariat on this topic, which should also be an item on the agenda of the Codex Committee on General Principles.
162. The delegation of the United Kingdom was requested to prepare a document on how the CAC might play a greater role as regards nutritional considerations in Codex work in the years to come. The delegation undertook to prepare such a document for consideration by the Codex Committee on General Principles.
163. There were no further suggestions or proposals put forward under this Agenda Item additional to those considered under Future Work.
164. The Commission had before it ALINORM 85/44 Part I which reported progress by countries in the implementation of the Code of Ethics since its 15th Session.
165. The Commission was informed that, as a result of further circular letters on the subject, four further countries (Argentina, Canada, Ireland and Sweden) had replied indicating that the provisions of their national legislation were generally in line with the provisions of the Code or had otherwise indicated a positive attitude to the Code.
166. The Commission requested the Secretariat to continue to seek a greater degree of responses from governments regarding the implementation of the Code.
167. The Commission considered document ALINORM 85/44, Part II, which recalled the position taken by the Executive Committee at its 31st Session (June 1984) 1 - reproduced in para. 6 of the document - and also contained the views of the Regional Coordinating Committees for Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean, and for Europe, as well as the views of five governments (Argentina, Ireland, New Zealand, Sweden, Thailand).
168. The Commission also had before it the report of the 32nd Session of the Executive Committee (document ALINORM 85/4), which reflected its deliberations on the views of Regional Coordinating Committees and governments set forth in document ALINORM 85/44, Part II, as well as its decision to maintain the position it had adopted at its 31st Session regarding the draft amendments.
169. The amendments proposed by the Executive Committee read as follows:
Add new paragraph (g) in the Preamble as follows:
“(g) The International Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes sets forth principles for the protection and promotion of breast-milk feeding, which is an important aspect of primary health care.”
Paragraph 5.9 to read as follows:
“5.9 Food for infants, children and other vulnerable groups should be in accordance with standards elaborated by the Codex Alimentarius Commission.”
Paragraph 5.10 (b) to read as follows:
“(b) Information concerning the nutritional value of food should not mislead the public.”
170. In presenting the aforementioned documents to the Commission at the request of the Chairman, the Legal Counsel of WHO recalled that, after the Code of Ethics had been adopted by the Commission in 1979, and the International Code of Marketing of Breast-Milk
Substitutes by the World Health Assembly in 1981, the question arose whether Section 5.9 of the Code of Ethics was fully compatible with the WHO Code. This question had been considered repeatedly by the Commission and Executive Committee and various amendments had been proposed and examined at various levels. A set of three draft amendments had been agreed upon by the Executive Committee and were now submitted to the Commission for a final decision.
171. The Chairman thanked the WHO Legal Counsel and stressed the point that the time had now come for the Commission to take a decision. He felt that the Commission should give favourable consideration to the adoption of the amendments proposed by the Executive Committee. He invited any delegations who might have doubts on the text proposed to express their views. The Swedish delegation, supported by the Norwegian delegation, stated that, in its opinion, it would have been preferable to maintain the following phrase (at present in Article 5.9(b) of the Code of Ethics):
“No claims in any form should be permitted that would directly or indirectly encourage a mother not to breastfeed her child, or imply that breastmilk substitutes are superior to breastmilk”.
172. The Commission, having noted the above observations, decided to adopt the amendments in the form submitted by the Executive Committee.
