11. The Commission received reports concerning the Twenty-Seventh and Twenty-Eighth Sessions of the Executive Committee held from 13 to 17 October 1980 and from 25 to 26 June 1981 in Geneva. The reports of these two sessions were contained in ALINORM 81/3 and ALINORM 81/4. In introducing and reviewing the reports, the Chairman indicated that all substantive items considered by the Executive Committee would be dealt with by the Commission under the agenda items of the Commission relating to the matters concerned.
12. The Commission had before it a list of Members of the Codex Alimentarius Commission. The Membership is set out below. The Commission noted that since its last session four more countries - Bahrain, Cape Verde, Democratic People's Republic of Korea and Sierra Leone - had become members of the Commission bringing the current membership to 121 countries. The Commission requested the Secretariat to intensify its efforts to increase membership of the Commission and to advise non-member countries of the advantages of membership.
AFRICA
ASIA
EUROPE
LATIN AMERICA
NORTH AMERICA
SOUTH-WEST PACIFIC
13. The Commission had before it a full list of recommended Codex standards and Codex maximum limits for pesticide residues sent to governments for acceptance (ALINORM 81/2, Appendix IV). The Commission also had before it in ALINORM 81/2, Addendum l a list of recommended Codex standards and Codex maximum limits for pesticide residues adopted by the Commission at its 13th Session and to be issued to governments for acceptance. The document also included a list of recommended codes of hygienic and/or technological practice and other texts adopted by the Codex Alimentarius Commission.
14. The published “Summary of Acceptances of Recommended Worldwide and Regional Codex Standards and Recommended Codex Maximum Limits for Pesticides” (Ref. No. CAC/Acceptances Rev. 1) which had been sent to all member governments, contained full details of all acceptances notified up to 30 October 1978. Details of acceptances received between 31 October 1978 and 1 October 1979 had been set forth in document ALINORM 79/5 which had been put before the 13th Session of the Commission. Since then further acceptances had been received as summarized in ALINORM 81/2 and ALINORM 81/2-Add. 1. Additional information concerning acceptances was given to the Commission orally by the Secretariat. Document ALINORM 81/2 and 81/2-Add. l contained information concerning acceptances received from the following countries: Argentina, Canada, Cyprus, El Salvador, Gambia, Federal Republic of Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iran, Jordan, Kenya, New Zealand, Norway, Peru, Portugal, South Africa, Thailand, Tunisia, United Kingdom, United States of America. Additional information concerning acceptances or other action on the standards was made available by Argentina, Canada, Finland, Poland, Portugal and Spain.
15. Argentina had given acceptance with specified deviations to the General Standard for Edible Fats and Oils not covered by individual standards and to the following standards for edible fats and oils: Edible Soyabean Oil, Edible Arachis Oil, Edible Sunflowerseed Oil, Edible Rapeseed Oil, Edible Maize Oil, Edible Sesameseed Oil, Edible Safflowerseed Oil, Mustardseed Oil and Olive Oil. Argentina had also notified acceptance with specified deviations of the standards for Quick Frozen Fillets of Cod and Haddock, Quick Frozen Fillets of Ocean Perch, Quick Frozen Fillets of Hake, Quick Frozen Lobsters, Quick Frozen Shrimps or Prawns and Canned Sardines and Sardine-type Products. Argentina had also notified acceptance with specified deviations of the standard for Chocolate. Details of these deviations which relate mainly to food additives and also to declarations of country of origin would be given in the next up-dating of the Summary of Acceptances. Argentina had also found many of the Recommended Codes of Practice to be fully acceptable. These included the Codes of Hygienic Practice for Dried Fruits, Desiccated Coconut and Dehydrated Fruits and Vegetables including Edible Fungi, Treenuts, Molluscan Shellfish, Shrimps and Prawns and the Codes of Practice for Canned Fish and Fresh Fish.
16. The Delegation of Argentina recalled that Argentina had already notified the Commission at earlier sessions of its acceptance of many other standards. Details of these earlier acceptances were contained in the already published “Summary of Acceptances”.
17. Canada had notified acceptance with specified deviations of several standards for milk products including Butter and Whey Butter, Butter Oil and Anhydrous Butter Oil, Evaporated Milk and Evaporated Skimmed Milk, Sweetened Condensed Milk and Skimmed Sweetened Condensed Milk, Whole Milk Powder, Partly Skimmed Milk Powder and Skimmed Milk Powder, the General Standard for Cheese, the General Standard for Whey Cheese, and the standards for Cream for Direct Consumption, Edible Acid Casein, Edible Caseinates. Canada had also notified acceptance with specified deviations of the standard for Rendered Pork Fat and the standard for Fructose. Canada had further notified free distribution with specified conditions in the case of the standard for Cream Powder, Half Cream Powder and High Fat Milk Powder as well as in the case of the standard for Edible Babassu Oil. Canada had indicated that it was unable to accept the standard for Cocoa Powder and Dry Cocoa Sugar Mixtures, but that products conforming to the standard would be permitted to be distributed freely in Canada.
18. Finland had indicated that it had made a very thorough study of all the present Codex standards and had compared them with Finnish regulations. Codex standards had been used as a basis of reference in the elaboration of modern Finnish food regulations, which were, to a great extent, in line with the Codex standards. The principal differences were regarding food additives and labelling provisions. Finland hoped to be able to set out more precisely at a later time its position concerning the question of acceptance of a number of Codex standards.
19. Poland had indicated that it was considering acceptance of several Codex standards. Poland had notified acceptance of the standards for Olive Oil and the European Regional Standard for Fresh Fungus Chanterelle. Poland had also notified acceptance with specified deviations (relating to heavy metal contaminants) of the European Regional Standard for Honey.
20. Portugal had indicated its position concerning the Maximum Limits for Pesticide Residues contained in the Fifth and Sixth Series. For the moment, Portugal was notifying limited acceptance until such time as Portugal's position in relation to membership of the EEC had been defined more precisely. For the time being, Portugal would permit the entry of products containing pesticide residues levels which were not greater than the levels laid down by the Codex Alimentarius Commission. The Delegation of Portugal indicated during the course of the Session that it was ready to accept the Standard for Edible Cottonseed Oil, with certain deviations.
21. Spain had indicated its position concerning the question of acceptance of the Maximum Limits for Pesticide Residues contained in the Sixth Series.
22. The Representative of the Commission of the European Economic Community (EEC) made available to the Codex Alimentarius Commission a detailed communication from the EEC concerning the acceptance of Codex standards, including maximum limits for pesticide residues. The document supplied by the European Economic Community indicated that the Community had been prompted, by the orientations agreed by the Codex Committee on General Principles, to indicate for a series of Codex standards the conditions under which the products concerned may be marketed in the territory of the Community. This action by the EEC would be a move in the direction of fulfilling one of the objectives of the Codex programme, namely to achieve the freer circulation of foodstuffs. The document drew attention to the fact that there were already a number of fields covered by Codex standards which were also covered by Community Directives or Regulations and indicated those areas where the Community had already notified acceptance to the Codex Alimentarius Commission. The Community had already been able to indicate to the Commission its position concerning pesticide residues on and in fruits and vegetables and its position concerning the standards for fruit juices and similar products. It was also the intention of the Community to inform the Codex Alimentarius Commission of the legislative situation in the member states of the Community in the following sectors: Processed Fruits and Vegetables, Fish Products and certain Maximum Limits for Pesticide Residues in the Sixth Series.
23. The Delegation of Cuba stated that a new organization called the State Committee for Standardization had been established in Cuba and that this body was now the one responsible for considering Codex work in Cuba. The Delegation of Cuba indicated that Cuba was aware of the benefits of participation in the Codex Programme and hoped to be able to indicate Cuba's position in relation to Codex standards and recommendations in the future.
24. The Delegation of Ghana stated that great use had been made of Codex standards in Ghana in the development of national standards and that machinery for the acceptance of Codex standards had been set in motion.
25. The Delegation of Czechoslovakia stated that Czechoslovakia and other member countries had, within the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance (CMEA), discussed acceptance of Codex standards. Agreement had been reached on a common approach to the question of accepting Codex standards. Some of the Codex standards would be accepted as CMEA standards and others would be accepted individually by the member countries of CMEA. The Delegation of Czechoslovakia added that considerable importance was attached by the CMEA to Codex work.
26. The Delegation of Hungary informed the Commission that it had undertaken, at the last session of the Coordinating Committee for Europe, to carry out comparative studies of Codex and CMEA standards and that this work was under way. The Delegation of Hungary added that several Hungarian standards were already generally in line with Codex standards.
27. The Delegation of Chile stated that the National Codex Committee in Chile was studying the Codex standards which were regarded as points of reference for the development of national Chilean standards.
28. The Delegation of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya indicated that Codex standards were being used as the basis of development of Libyan national standards. The Delegation also stressed the importance of establishing efficient national food control services for the proper implementation of the standards. The Delegation thought that it would be desirable for the Secretariat to explain more fully to Member Countries the benefits to be derived from acceptance of Codex standards.
29. The Delegation of the United Kingdom indicated that Target Acceptance previously notified in respect of the Sixth Series of Maximum Limits for Pesticide Residues had been converted to Limited Acceptance with effect from 1 August 1981.
30. The Delegation of Kenya stated that Kenya had under consideration six Codex standards with a view to accepting them eventually. These were the standards for Honey, Glucose Syrup, Canned Green Beans, Canned Mushrooms, Canned Peas and Pineapple Juice. As regards the acceptance of Maximum Limits for Pesticide Residues, surveys in Kenya were being carried out currently to ascertain actual residue levels before considering acceptance of Codex Maximum Limits.
31. The Delegation of Sweden stated that the importance of Codex work had been increasing over the years. Sweden had certain difficulties of a legal nature as regards the amount of detail in some Codex standards and was, therefore, considering acceptance with specified deviations, as well as the question of permitting free entry without actually notifying acceptance. Sweden was also looking at the Maximum Limits for Pesticide Residues contained in the Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Series.
32. The Delegation of Iraq indicated that steps were being taken to strengthen work on food control and food standards in Iraq, and that Iraq hoped to be in a position to notify its position concerning acceptance before too long. Iraq was using Codex standards as reference material in the development of its own national standards.
33. The Delegation of Egypt gave a brief description of monitoring activities in Egypt for residues of pesticides in the food basket.
34. The Representative of the Arab Organization for Standardization and Metrology (ASMO) referred to his Organization's report on the activities concerning food standards and food control. He indicated that many of the ASMO standards were based on Codex standards and that a series of new committees had been formed to deal with food standards.
35. Italy had communicated to the Secretariat (document ALINORM 81/2-Add. 1). that it would wish the Committee of Government Experts on Milk and Milk Products to examine the matter concerning the use of recombined and reconstituted products in the manufacture of cheese and the use of the designation “cheese” for these products. The Commission agreed that this matter was a matter appropriate for consideration by the Committee on Milk and Milk Products at its next session.
36. The Commission was of the opinion that there was clear evidence of steady progress by member countries regarding acceptance of Codex standards. Although the Commission was encouraged by the responses notified, it considered that member countries should give more attention to acceptances. In particular, the Commission recommended that where a country was unable to give acceptance it should give serious consideration to the possibility of allowing free distribution of foods in conformity with Codex standards. The Commission requested the Secretariat to make available to those countries which had not yet become members of the Commission further information concerning the meaning of, and benefits to be derived from, acceptance of Codex standards.
37. The Commission had before it ALINORM 81/5. The Commission noted that the Executive Committee at its 27th and 28th sessions had reviewed the financial situation of the programme in 1979, 1980/81 and the proposed budgetary estimates of 1982/83 (paragraphs 70–102 of ALINORM 81/3 and paragraphs 10–13 of ALINORM 81/4). The Commission noted that the matter of the deficit of $ 250,000 arising in 1979 in meeting the programme's commitments concerning two sessions of the Commission in the biennium 1978/79, had been absorbed by FAO and the programme was no longer faced with this difficulty for 1980/81.
38. Regarding the current biennium 1980/81 the Commission was pleased to note that the programme's projected level of activities could be sustained within the limits of the budget, and that the programme would break even for the biennium. This outcome was possible due to the introduction of certain economies concerning documentation and publications.
39. The Commission expressed its appreciation of the actions taken by the Directors-General of FAO and WHO concerning the recommendations of the Executive Committee on the need to maintain the level of budget of the programme in 1982/83 at a level corresponding in real terms to that of 1980/81. The Commission was pleased to note that the WHO share of the budget for 1982/83 had already received the approval of the World Health Assembly. The FAO share was still subject to approval by the FAO Conference, which would meet in November 1981. The Commission noted that the question of cost-sharing was a matter for the Directors-General themselves and that information on changes if any would be conveyed to the Executive Committee or the Commission at their next sessions. The Commission further noted that the programme's requirements over a long-term would be examined in order to ensure a better basis for planning the programme and to enable host governments to plan also their involvement in hosting and servicing of the Commission's subsidiary bodies.
40. The Delegation of Australia, whilst noting the action taken by FAO and WHO, stated that the budget level proposed for 1982/83 continued to represent a declining trend in the percentage of resources from the overall regular budgets of FAO and WHO available for Codex activities. The Delegation of the USA expressed the view that the interval between Commission sessions should be reduced as soon as practicable to eighteen months. The Commission noted in this context the general overall financial restraints on the regular budgets of the two Agencies.
41. Concerning the Secretariat proposals to try to effect greater economies in respect of documentation and to improve their distribution to the Members of the Commission, the Commission agreed with the steps proposed and taken by the Secretariat as endorsed by the Executive Committee at its 28th Session (paragraphs 13 and 14 of ALINORM 81/4). The Commission was informed that it was the Secretariat's intention to contact all Members of the Commission individually to seek their views on the number of copies of documents required and what distribution arrangements best suited the needs of the country. Several Members of the Commission suggested that more flexibility in the numbers of copies might be contemplated and other thought that the idea of a uniform but reasonable number of copies might be proposed to Members. The Commission emphasized that care should be taken to involve National Codex Contact Points fully as well as the principal technical Ministries concerned with Codex activities. Several Members of the Commission suggested that the practice of sending working documents to the participants of previous sessions of the subsidiary bodies might be abandoned. The Commission further noted that the Executive Committee would examine, at its next session, a progress report to be prepared by the Secretariat, on these matters.
