324. The Commission had before it the Report of the 11th Session of the Codex Committee on Fats and Oils (ALINORM 81/17 and Corrigendum).
325. The Report was introduced by Dr. J.R. Park of the United Kingdom Delegation on behalf of the retired Chairman, Mr. A.W. Hubbard. Dr. Park also informed the Commission that Dr. P. Bunyan had been nominated Chairman of the Codex Committee on Fats and Oils, and that the next session of that Committee was scheduled to be held from 19 to 23 April 1982 in London.
326. The Chairman recalled the valuable and constructive chairmanship of Mr. Hubbard who had also greatly contributed to the work of the Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives and, as an FAO consultant, had advised member countries on food contamination problems. Speaking on behalf of the Commission, the Chairman conveyed to Mr. Hubbard his sincere thanks for his excellent work and best wishes for many happy years of retirement.
327. The Commission noted that the Committee was continuing its work on proposed draft standards for vegetable ghee, and mixed vegetable and animal ghee. Further comments at Step 3 had been requested on the two standards contained in Appendices VI and VII. Further information was especially needed on the name of the product and on certain compositional requirements. The Commission was also informed of the decision of the Committee not to develop at this time a standard for ghee substitutes consisting solely of animal fats. Governments were, however, requested to submit information which would demonstrate that these products were important food items.
328. Dr. Park reported on the progress of work on the amendment of the Codex standard for Rapeseed Oil, in order to make the standard applicable to all rapeseed oils except low erucic acid rapeseed oil for which a separate Codex standard had been adopted.
329. It was noted that the Committee had requested comments at Step 3 on a proposed amendment to the Codex standard for Olive Oils concerning the level of β - sitosterol and appropriate methodology. In connection with this standard, the Commission was informed that the Committee was considering an amendment to introduce a requirement for fatty acids at position 2, pending approval of limits by the International Olive Oil Council. IOOC had now finalized its work on this matter. The Commission authorized the Committee to commence amending the Codex standard for Olive Oils in accordance with the appropriate procedure. The Committee was still awaiting the evaluation of collaborative trials on methods of analysis for tocopherols. Other matters on methods of analysis under consideration by the Committee included a general review of methods of analysis in Codex standards for fats and oils. This review will be further continued, having regard to the advice from the Codex Committee on Methods of Analysis and to additional comments from governments. The Commission agreed that the Committee could proceed rapidly with purely editorial amendments.
330. The Commission was further informed that the Committee had decided, at this time, not to introduce mandatory sterol ranges into standards for edible oils due to insufficient data available to develop meaningful ranges.
331. Governments had also been requested to advise on the content and format of a possible compendium of Codex standards for fats and oils. Data were being collected on processing aids and their residue limits for inclusion into a list of processing aids with the understanding that this list would be an open one and purely advisory. On this matter close liaison would be maintained with the Codex Committee on Food Additives.
332. The Commission noted that the Committee was considering extending the scope of Codex standards for fats and oils as the majority of oils in world trade was now outside the scope, since these products required further processing in order to render them fit for human consumption. However, certain identity characteristics, in particular GLC ranges for fatty acid composition, were applicable to these products. Government comments were being sought on this matter.
333. The Commission had also before it proposals for Step 8 amendments and comments as contained in ALINORM 81/37, Parts I and III. The Commission was informed that this standard, in effect, covered products which were sold as alternatives to margarine and which had a fat content of 39–41%. Comments on food additives submitted to the 11th Session of the Committee had been tabulated in Appendix IV.
334. The Commission noted that the provisions for food additives, contaminants, hygiene, labelling and methods of analysis had been endorsed with the exception of the group of thickening agents (pending sufficient technological justification) and polyglycerol esters of interesterified ricinoleic acid (lower level of 5 mg/kg suggested due to low ADI). The Commission agreed with the latter and noted that a working group, by correspondence, was already working on the technological justification for thickening agents.
335. The Rapporteur point out that, in general, all amendment proposals of a technical nature had been already considered by the Committee and suggested not to take any further action. The Delegation of Belgium indicated that certain editorial adjustments were needed and that the French version of the standard had to be aligned with the English text. The Secretariat was requested to take care of this.
336. The Delegation of Egypt expressed its reservation on the use of marine oils and drew attention to the fact that labelling provisions stating the absence of pork fats were necessary for products which were sold in Moslem countries.
337. The Delegation of Norway, supported by the Delegation of Denmark, expressed the view that it would be more appropriate to provide for a positive label declaration, i.e. to declare that the fat component was in fact of vegetable origin only. It was noted that this matter was of a general nature and would also be considered by the Codex Committee on Food Labelling in connection with the revision of the General Standard.
338. The Delegation of the USA, supported by the Delegation of Portugal, expressed concern about developing a standard which, in its opinion, covered a propriety product characterized by its narrow range of 39–41% fat content, when the Committee was also developing a standard for similar fat spreads with fat contents ranging from 35–70%. The latter standard could include minarine with separate labelling provisions. The Delegations of Thailand and New Zealand, supported this view and explained their reasons for opposing the standard which were also given in their written comments.
339. The Delegations of Switzerland and Denmark supported the adoption of the standard since the product was well defined in their countries. In Switerland a standard would soon be submitted for adoption by the authorities in this respect. The Representative of the International Federation of Margarine Associations indicated that indeed minarine was widely accepted as a reduced fat spread which provided in a convenient manner a lower energy intake. The Representative of IFMA stated also that, in his opinion, there was no need for a standard covering products with a widened range of 40 – 70%, since production of these products was limited and they did not appear in international trade. A wide range of products with different fat contents might even be confusing for the consumer or might lead to deceptive practices and be misleading as to the value of the products.
Status of the Draft Standard for Minarine
340. The Commission decided to adopt the above standard at Step 8 of the Procedure. The Delegation of Thailand reiterated its statement that minarine was not permitted in Thailand.
341. The Rapporteur indicated that this standard covered products of different fat contents for which the name and the exact fat content range were still under discussion. The standard was being elaborated to recognize the fact that such products were being developed. He pointed out that the provisions for food additives were similar to the standard for minarine. The Rapporteur indicated that the Codex Committee on Fats and Oils would take into consideration the views of the United States in connection with the Standard for Minarine.
342. The Delegation of the Federal Republic of Germany, supported by Belgium, expressed the opinion that, since the minarine standard had been adopted, there was no need to elaborate this standard.
Status of the Proposed Draft Standard for / Fat Spreads/Spreadable Table Fats /
343. The Commission adopted the above standard at Step 5 and advanced it to Step 6 of the Procedure.
Confirmation of Chairmanship
344. The Commission confirmed under Rule IX.10 that the Codex Committee on Fats and Oils should continue to be under the Chairmanship of the Government of the United Kingdom.
345. The Commission had before it the Report of the 15th Session of the Codex Committee on Processed Fruits and Vegetables (ALINORM 81/20) and government comments on the Step 8 standards, contained in ALINORM 81/37-Part II. Further written comments had been received during the session. Dr. R. Weik of the Delegation of the United States of America introduced the various items arising from the report of the Committee.
346. The Delegation of the United Kingdom indicated that it had reservations concerning some of the provisions for defects in the Draft Codex Standard. The Delegation of Australia indicated that it had similar reservations and also expressed the opinion that it would be difficult for producing countries to meet the requirements of the standard especially in respect of insect damage and mouldy product. In the opinion of both these delegations, the draft Codex standard should, therefore, not be adopted as a Codex standard.
347. The Commission noted these remarks but considered that the draft standard represented the best compromise between the interests of importing and those of exporting countries which could be achieved at this time.
Status of the Draft Standard for Dried Apricots
348. The Commission adopted the Draft Standard for Dried Apricots at Step 8 of the Procedure for the Elaboration of Worldwide Codex Standards. The Delegations of the UK and Australia opposed this decision.
349. The Delegation of Turkey was of the opinion that certain aspects of the draft standard such as classification by varietal type and size classification required further consideration and suggested that the draft standard be returned to Step 7. It informed the Commission that studies were in progress in that country on these aspects and that results were to be expected within two years.
350. The Commission noted these remarks and indicated that the standard could be revised at a later stage in the light of new information to be supplied by Turkey.
Status of the Standard for Unshelled Pistachio Nuts
351. The Commission adopted the Draft Standard for Unshelled Pistachio Nuts at Step 8 of the Procedure for the Elaboration of Worldwide Codex Standards. The Delegation of Turkey opposed this decision.
352. The Delegations of the Federal Republic of Germany and France indicated that they wished to propose several technical amendments to the standard. Furthermore, they objected to the provision on flavours, as this made possible the use of inferior fruit ingredients, the organoleptic properties of which could be improved through the use of various synthetic or natural flavouring preparations.
353. The Commission noted that these objections had been considered by the Codex Committee during the elaboration of the draft standard.
Status of the Draft Standard for Canned Apricots
354. The Commission adopted the Draft Standard for Canned Apricots at Step 8 of the Procedure for the Elaboration of Worldwide Codex Standards. The Delegations of the Federal Republic of Germany and France disagreed with this decision.
355. The Delegation of Iraq indicated that there were substantive changes which Iraq, as a major producing country, wished to propose to the draft standard. These proposed changes had not been previously considered by the Committee. The Delegation of Iraq indicated that the standard, if adopted without the changes referred to, would have a negative economic impact for a number of developing countries which produced and exported a large part of the world production of dates. For these reasons it proposed that the draft standard be returned to the Committee. The Delegation of Tunisia drew attention to a number of proposed changes of a technical nature relating to aspects such as moisture content, definitions of defects, and indicated that these should be considered by the Committee. The Delegations of Saudi Arabia Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Cameroon and Egypt were in full support of the proposal of Iraq.
356. The Commission received a statement from the FAO Secretariat, Dr. H. El Haidari, concerning FAO's activities in the field of production and marketing of dates as part of an FAO regional project. The Representative of ASMO indicated that the Organization had elaborated a standard for dates and that this should also be taken into account in the elaboration of a worldwide standard.
357. The Commission noted the opinion of these Members regarding the draft standard and the the view that there was a need for further changes to the standard, in the light of the technical comments received, as well as further information to be supplied by interested countries and international organizations. The Commission expressed the hope that the revision of the draft standard for dates would be carried out through a joint effort of interested producing and importing countries and the interested international organizations. In this connection it was stressed that it would be necessary for the interested parties to submit technical comments well in advance of the next session of the Codex Committee on Processed Fruits and Vegetables which should consider these comments. It was also imperative that the countries and organizations concerned attend the Session of the Committee in order to represent their interest effectively.
Status of the Draft Standard for Dates
358. The Commission decided to return the Draft Standard for Dates to Step 6 of the Codex Procedure.
359. The Commission noted that these products were of special interest to a number of developing countries and that it was essential for those countries to submit further comments and/or participate at the next session of the Committee. The Commission decided to advance the above three Proposed Draft Standards to Step 6 of the Codex Procedure.
360. The Commission had before it the Proposed Draft Amendments, at Step 5 (see Appendix II, ALINORM 81/20), to the Recommended International Standard for Pears (CAC/RS 61-1972) with the recommendation that Steps 6 and 7 be omitted. Noting that the amendments were uncontroversial the Commission decided to omit Steps 6 and 7 and adopted the amendments at Step 8 of the Codex Procedure for the Elaboration of Worldwide Codex Standards.
“The exclusion of nectarines has been applied only for reasons of processing”.
362. The Commission adopted the footnote as requested by the Committee and requested the Secretariat to bring it to the attention of governments. It was noted that this clarification was effective forthwith and could be used to resolve any difficulties in trade in nectarines.
364. The Commission agreed that the Codex Committee on Processed Fruits and Vegetables should commence and handle the amendment of the Sampling Plans in conformity with the Codex Step Procedure. This should, however, be done in cooperation with the Codex Committee on Methods of Analysis and Sampling, in view of the fact that the revision of the Sampling Plans, which were of general application, also involved consideration of a number of general issues which related to the work of the CCMAS.
Confirmation of Chairmanship
365. The Commission confirmed under Rule IX.10 that the Codex Committee on Processed Fruits and Vegetables should continue to be under the Chairmanship of the Government of the United States of America.
366. The Commission had before it the Report of the Fourteenth Session of the Group of Experts (ALINORM 81/14) and documents ALINORM 81/37-Part I and Part III containing the observations of governments on the several Draft and Proposed Draft Standards under discussion.
367. The report was introduced by Dr. C.C. van der Meys of the Delegation of the Netherlands, on behalf of the Chairman of the Group of Experts, Prof. Dr. W. Pilnik (Netherlands), who was unable to be present at the session. The delegation drew attention to the matters of general interest discussed by the Group of Experts and particularly referred to the work being undertaken on the juices of certain tropical fruits, which were of interest to several developing countries. It was also noted that the Joint Group would be considering problems of contaminants and labelling (date marking) as general issues at its next session. It was expected that this work would require at least two further sessions for completion, and that any decision to extend the programme of the Group of Experts would depend on requests of Governments for it to undertake additional work.
368. In considering the adoption of this standard, the Commission noted the reservation of the Delegation of Egypt concerning the maximum level of ethanol permitted to be present in the product and on the proposals for date marking. The Delegation of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya stressed the importance of maintaining the level of fruit ingredient and of elaborating a suitable method for determining that ingredient. The Representative of the EEC repeated the Community's reservations concerning “Name of the Food” in cases where more than one type of juice was used, and on the proposed provisions for date marking.
369. The Commission noted that the Group of Experts would be reviewing the matter of date marking at its next session and adopted at Step 8, without change, the Draft Standard for Nectars of Certain Citrus Fruits Preserved Exclusively by Physical Means.
370. A number of delegations expressed dissatisfaction with the proposed draft standard particularly in so far as the fruit content was concerned. It was noted that considerable confusion had arisen and could continue to arise over the presence in international trade of this product, and the product commonly known as “mango juice”, but which was in fact prepared from pulp and added water. The Coordinating Committees of Africa, Asia and Latin America, in examining this issue at the request of the Group of Experts had considered that the product commonly known as “mango juice” should be allowed to be sold under that name in regions where this name was traditionally known. Other delegations were of the opinion that a product to which water had been added should not be sold as a fruit juice. The Delegation of Cuba after having indicated the problems concerning the designation “mango juice” also expressed the view that no suitable method of analysis was available for the determination of fruit content.
371. The Commission recognized that much of the present discussion concerned the Proposed Draft Standard for Mango Juice Preserved Exclusively by Physical Means which had been retained by the Group of Experts at Step 4. In order to clarify the relationship between these two Proposed Draft Standards the Commission directed that they both be returned to Step 3 for further comment and that their further elaboration be considered in tandem.
372. The Commission noted reservations of the Representative of the EEC and advanced the Proposed Draft Standard to Step 6 of the Codex Procedure.
373. The Representative of the EEC noted that organization's reservations concerning the development of this standard and the use of this product in general. The Commission noted, however, that the product was in international commerce and that it was of particular interest to producer countries. It was further noted that the product was not sold directly to the consumer, nor was it intended as an ingredient in fruit juices and nectars.
374. The Commission advanced the Proposed Draft Standard to Step 6 of the Codex Procedure.
375. The Commission had before it the Report of the Fourteenth Session of the Group of Experts as contained in ALINORM 81/25, and the comments of governments on aspects of the several draft standards (ALINORM 81/37-Part III, 81/38 and 81/38-Add. 1; and LIM 6). In the absence of the Chairman of the Group of Experts, Dr. T. van Hiele (Netherlands), the report was introduced by the Representative of the UN/ECE Secretariat.
376. The Commission adopted both Draft Standards at Step 8 of its Procedure for the Elaboration of Worldwide Codex Standards. In doing so, it noted that some of the Provisions for the methods of analysis and sampling required completion and endorsement.
377. It was noted that the Group of Experts had made a considerable number of alterations to the Draft Standard for Carrots and had requested comments on this text to be sent to the Rapporteur (Mr. W.G. Aldershoff, Netherlands) for a revised Draft Standard to be prepared for discussion at the present session. The Commission had before it the revised text, ALINORM 81/38-Add. 1, and additional comments in Conference Room Document LIM 6. Consultations during the course of the Commission's session revealed that several delegations which had commented on the earlier draft remained unsatisfied with the revised text.
378. The Commission returned the Draft Standard to Step 6 of the Procedure, and in view of the fact that the Joint Group of Experts had agreed to adjourn sine die, (see paragraph 386 below) asked the Joint Secretariat and the Rapporteur to obtain further comments and to prepare a new revised text for consideration at Steps 7 and 8 at the next session of the Commission.
380. In view of the adjournment sine die of the Group, the Commission agreed to the following procedure for the further elaboration of the Code:
the draft Code will be sent to governments for comments at Step 6 and the comments received will be collated by the Joint Secretariat;
the International Institute of Refrigeration (IIR) will act as Rapporteur and will prepare a revised draft Code;
the Commission at its Fifteenth Session will consider the Code at Steps 7 and 8.
381. The Commission noted the view of the Group of Experts that the Draft Code, when finalized, should be used as a basis for further discussion on the Agreement on the Carriage of Perishable Foodstuffs and on the Special Equipment to be Used for Such Carriage (ATP), currently under revision by the UN/ECE.
382. The Commission accepted the proposals of the Joint Group to amend the Recommended International Code of Practice as follows:
383. The Commission noted that the second of these amendments was substantive in nature, but accepted the view of the Group of Experts that it was urgently required. Considering that the Code was of an advisory nature and that the Group of Experts had adjourned sine die, it exceptionally adopted the proposed amendment.
384. The Delegation of Switzerland drew the Commission's attention to the footnote to sections 5.6 and 6.3 of the Code of Practice and to the fact that they were out-of-date. The Commission agreed to change the footnotes to read:
“The provisions of this Section are subject to reconsideration by the Codex Alimentarius Commission at a future date”.
385. The Commission noted the conclusion of the Group of Experts that no system of mandatory date marking was at present applicable to quick frozen foods, and also noted the technical studies which had led the Group to this conclusion. It agreed with the Group of Experts that no “sell by”, “minimum durability” or “use by” dates should be permitted without home storage instructions which were consistent with the design of commonly available frozen food storage compartments or food freezers. It was noted that this matter would need to be reviewed following future developments in manufacturing techniques and in design of industrial, retail and domestic cold storage appliances.
386. The Commission accepted the decision of the Group of Experts to adjourn sine die, in view of the completion of its present work programme, and noted that any discussion to reconvene the Group would probably be in about five years' time, in the light of the need to undertake new work or to consider revisions of the texts already elaborated, especially in regard to date marking.
388. The Commission entrusted the work of the Joint ECE/Codex Alimentarius Group of Experts on Standardization of Quick Frozen Foods to its Joint Secretariat until such time as the Group was reconvened and a new Chairman elected.
389. The Commission noted the retirement of the Chairman of the Group of Experts, Dr. T. van Hiele of the Sprenger Instituut of the Netherlands and recalled his many years of association with the Codex Alimentarius Commission. Dr. van Hiele had been Chairman of the Joint Group of Experts from its Eighth Session in 1973 until its last. The Commission expressed its thanks to Dr. van Hiele and extended its best wishes to him in his retirement.
390. The Report of the 14th Session of the Codex Committee on Fish and Fishery Products was presented by the Chairman, Dr. O.R. Braekkan of Norway.
391. Dr. Braekkan informed the Commission that work was in progress on the following subjects:
Revision of the Recommended International Standard for Canned Pacific Salmon
Draft Standard for Quick Frozen Blocks of Fillets and Minced (Separated) Fish Flesh and Mixtures of Fillet and Minced Fish
Draft Standard for Quick Frozen Fish Sticks (Fish Fingers) and Fish Portions Breaded or in Batter
Draft Code of Practice for Frozen Battered and/or Breaded Fishery Products
Microbiological Specifications for Shrimps and Prawns
Harmonization of Recommended Defects Tables in Standards for Quick Frozen Fish Fillets
392. The Commission also noted that the Committee was examining the feasibility of developing a standard for Frozen Block of Whole, Headless and Gutted Fish and the need for a Codex Code of Practice for Food Grade Fish Concentrates.
Draft Code of Practice for Minced Fish (ALINORM 81/18, Appendix VIII), and
Draft Code of Practice for Crabs.
Status of the Codes
394. The Commission noted that no Government comments had been received on the above Codes and agreed to advance them to Step 6 of the Procedure.
395. The Chairman informed the Commission that the Committee had a full programme of work in progress and that it was likely that at least two sessions would be required for its completion.
Confirmation of Chairmanship
396. The Commission confirmed under Rule IX.10 that the Codex Committee on Fish and Fishery Products should continue to be under the Chairmanship of the Government of Norway.
398. The Commission was informed that, after full discussion, the Committee had made a large number of substantial amendments to the General Standard for the Labelling of and Claims for Prepackaged Foods for Special Dietary Uses. For this reason, the standard had been retained at Step 7 to give Governments the opportunity to consult and to discuss this amended text at the next session of the Committee.
399. In connection with discussing the above standard, the Committee recognized that medical foods might need different or additional provisions from other foods for special dietary uses and had accepted an offer from the Delegation of the United States to elaborate a first draft of appropriate guidelines.
400. The Commission noted that a working group had met prior to the session of the Committee on Foods for Special Dietary Uses to discuss the need for a standard or guidelines for foods for special dietary uses which were suitable for use in the prescribed dietary regimen for diabetics. The Committee had agreed with the recommendation by the Working Group to elaborate such a standard and discussed a first draft of it. The standard had been advanced to Step 3 of the Procedure and Government comments thereon had been requested. The Commission further noted that the Committee had given consideration to a first draft of a standard for energy-reduced foods. A redraft would be circulated to Governments prior to the next session of the Committee.
401. The Rapporteur gave an outline of the new developments concerning a standard for follow-up and supplementary foods. It had been agreed that these were two different type of foods; in addition to a standard for follow-up foods, the Committee had decided to examine and up-date, as appropriate, PAG Guideline No. 8 (Protein-Rich Mixtures for Use as Supplementary Foods), provided the Commission could agree to extend the Committee's terms of reference. Since the Commission had agreed that the Committee on Foods for Special Dietary Uses should review its terms of reference in the light of the discussions on the nutritional aspects of Codex work under Item 8 (see para 18.iv), the Commission was informed that it was intended that a Working Group should convene prior to the next session of the Committee to carry out such a revision concerning the standard for follow-up foods and the PAG Guideline No. 8. The Commission agreed with this proposal.
402. The Rapporteur informed the Commission that the next session of the Committee on Foods for Special Dietary Uses was scheduled to be held from 16 to 24 September 1982 in Bonn-Bad Godesberg. The 16 and 17 September would be devoted to the meeting of the Working Group.
403. The Rapporteur pointed out that the Committee on Foods for Special Dietary Uses had indicated that it would like to be consulted on nutritional aspects of foods, having regard to the involvement of the Codex Alimentarius Commission in nutrition matters. In this particular case, the request related to guidelines on nutrition labelling developed by the Codex Committee on Food Labelling and to the review of the PAG Guideline No. 8 (see para. 401 above). The Committee had, therefore, requested the extension of its terms of reference accordingly. For the Commission's discussion and conclusions on this matter please see paragraphs 120 and 121.
404. The Assistant Director-General of WHO, Dr. D. Tejada-de-Rivero informed the Commission of developments which had led to the elaboration of an International Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes and indicated those areas related to the Code where WHO would expect assistance from the Codex Alimentarius Commission.
405. Dr. Tejada-de-Rivero stated that since 1969 many meetings and consultations of expert bodies had recommended that action be taken to promote breastfeeding and to regulate the promotion and marketing of breastmilk substitutes and other products which were offered as such.
406. At the request of one Member Country of WHO, a joint WHO/UNICEF Meeting on Infant and Young Child Feeding, held in October 1979, as part of the two Organizations' on-going programmes on the promotion of breastfeeding and improvement of infant and young child nutrition, brought together representatives of government, United Nations agencies, nongovernmental organizations, the infant food industry and specialists in related disciplines. The recommendations adopted by consensus at this meeting included:
“ … marketing of breastmilk substitutes and weaning foods should be designed not to discourage breastfeeding.
There should be no sales promotion, including promotional advertising to the public, of products to be used as breastmilk substitutes or bottle-fed supplements and feeding bottles.
There should be an international code of marketing of infant formula and other products used as breastmilk substitutes”.
407. The draft International Code developed on this basis had been the subject of numerous and lengthy consultations with all interested parties - governments, agencies of the United Nations system, non-governmental organizations, the infant food industry and experts in related disciplines. As the Executive Committee had been informed last October, the Code had drawn upon the work of the Codex for the development of suitable definitions and called for food products within the scope of the Code to conform with the quality, nutritional, hygienic and labelling requirements of Codex Standards and Codes of Practice concerning Infant Foods.
408. Since then the draft International Code had been submitted to the WHO Executive Board at its Sixty-Seventh Session in January 1981, in conformity with the Assembly's request made in May 1980. The Board had recommended unanimously to the Health Assembly that the Code be adopted in the form of a Recommendation; its Resolution (EB 67.R12) to this effect had contained the draft of a further Resolution (WHA 34.22) by which the Assembly subsequently had approved the Code in the form of a Recommendation at the close of its deliberations in May 1981. Copies of Resolution WHA 34.22, together with the Code which appears in Annex, had been made available to Members of the Commission.
409. Dr. Tejada-de-Rivero drew the Commission's attention to operative paragraph 4 of this Resolution whereby the Assembly “REQUESTS the FAO/WHO Codex Alimentarius Commission to give full consideration, within the framework of its operational mandate, to action it might take to improve the quality standards of infant foods, and to support and promote the implementation of the International Code”. It had been the Assembly's position that the Codex Alimentarius Commission should continue its collaboration with WHO in promoting the achievement of the aim of the Code which is the provision of safe and adequate nutrition for infants. In addition to fostering increased acceptance and application of existing standards, there was a number of areas where action by the Codex would be most welcome.
410. The first of these concerned labelling. In WHO's view, it was important that the labelling provisions (Section 10) of the Recommended International Standards for Foods for Infants and Children (CAC/RS 72/74 – 1976) be reviewed in the light of Article 9 on the same subject of the International Code. This would be particularly relevant with respect to “pictures or text which may idealize the use of infant formula” and paragraph 10.10, Optional Labelling in the Codex standard.
411. A second point, not directly related to the Code itself, concerned the suggestion that had been made in the past concerning the promotion of standardized measurements for the preparation of infant formula, whether in powdered or liquid form. The purpose of such common units of measurement would, no doubt, be to facilitate the correct use of these products for those infants and young children who need them, and to reduce the danger of “underfeeding”. The opinion of the Commission on the utility of such an exercise and the anticipated variables involved would be appreciated.
412. The last point concerned the “nutritional value and safety of products specifically intended for infant and young child feeding” in the Resolution WHA 34.23. Standards concerning the composition of infant formula had already been defined and include, for example, date marking and storage instructions (paragraph 10.8) in the Recommended International Standards for Foods for Infants and Children. However, relatively little was known of the specific tolerances of these products to the effects of storage and distribution that occur over time and under different climatic conditions, particularly in arid and tropical regions. It would be particularly useful if the Codex Alimentarius Commission could review Resolution WHA 34.23 and make specific suggestions on ways it would be prepared to cooperate with WHO for the successful carrying out of studies to assess changes in nutritional value and safety.
413. Dr. Tejada-de-Rivero requested the Commission to give consideration to the areas mentioned above to assist WHO in a task which was even greater than that of developing the Code within the overall aim to achieve “Health for all by the Year 2000”.
414. The Chairman thanked Dr. Tejada-de-Rivero for the excellent report on the developments concerning the development of the International Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes, and invited Members of the Commission to make recommendations as to how to respond to the request of WHO to assist in the implementation of certain matters indicated in the Code.
415. The Delegation of the Netherlands expressed its appreciation to WHO for developing the Code. The Delegation stated that, as the final text was now available, the Government of the Netherlands had already commenced work to examine possible action to implement the Code. Especially the Codex Committee on Food Labelling would have to consider the effect of the Code on the labelling provisions included in the standards for foods for infants and children. The delegation pointed out that other matters in the Code were of great importance and that it was important to assist WHO in implementing the Code.
416. The Delegation of Brazil stated that Brazil had voted in favour of the Code and was promoting knowledge of the Code in its country. The Delegation also expressed the view that more advice was needed in the form of a guideline, to identify all types of products which were covered by the Code. Countries would also need assistance to establish adequate national codes and standards. The Delegation of Brazil emphasized the importance of promoting the use of safe and potable water in connection with the preparation of these products.
417. The Observer from Angola stated that Angola was fully supporting the Code. The observer urged countries to adopt the Code as soon as possible, especially in view of the fact that food control and legislation covering imported foods was not always well developed in many countries and also the application of international food codes could not offer full protection.
418. The Delegation of Sudan expressed its concern that the use of the term “breastmilk substitutes” in the Code would be interpreted as an official confirmation that these products would in fact substitute breastmilk and could therefore contribute to the promotion of the products concerned.
419. The Delegation of Thailand informed the Commission that Thailand could not accept the Codex standards for infant formula and cereal based products and had therefore difficulty with Article 10 of the Code. These products, if they had to comply with all of the requirements in the standards, could become too expensive. In fact the high price would prevent these products reaching the low income groups in the country. Thailand was developing products based on locally available raw materials which would take into account the different needs of populations living in different regions of the country and which could be sold at a reasonable price.
420. The Delegation of Switzerland stated that Switzerland entirely endorsed the philosophy of the Code and that Switzerland had voted for its adoption. With regard to paragraph 4 of the Resolution WHA 34.22, the Delegation of Switzerland recommended that the Codex Alimentarius Commission consider all possibilities to assist countries in the implementation of the Code. The delegation further underlined that the quality criteria contained in the Codex standards already elaborated were fully satisfactory and could not constitute any risk. The delegation expressed its full confidence in the work of the Codex Committee on Foods for Special Dietary Uses on standards for foods for infants and children, especially concerning those provisions which guarantee the safety of the products. However, that Committee could consider a review of certain provisions for labelling and instructions for use and storage of foods for infants and children. The Commission agreed with the views expressed by the Delegation of Switzerland.
421. The Delegation of Kenya recognized that the Code provided valuable guidance on many important aspects and informed the Commission that action was already taken to implement the Code. The Delegation of Kenya underlined the importance of products made from indigenous ingredients and the need to take into account local requirements.
422. In conclusion, the Chairman expressed the Commission's appreciation to WHO and UNICEF for having taken into account the work of the Commission on standards and codes for foods for infants and children.
423. Whereas the Committee on Foods for Special Dietary Uses had indeed developed comprehensive standards to safeguard the quality of these products, it would be appropriate to review the sections dealing with labelling, advertising and instructions for use, having regard to the relevant articles of the Code. In the first instance this work should be carried out by the Committee on Foods for Special Dietary Uses. Subsequently the Codex Committee on Food Labelling would exercise its endorsement function. Further matters for consideration by the Codex Committee on Foods for Special Dietary Uses might relate to the nutritional value of the products and especially effects of storage time and conditions on this nutritional value. The Chairman invited Member Countries to submit their comments on this matter to the next session of this Committee to ensure a full discussion. The Commission concluded that the Codex Committee on Foods for Special Dietary Uses should consider all these matters on which the WHO had asked for assistance (see paras 410–412).
424. The Commission noted that Member Countries could obtain technical assistance from the Food Policy and Nutrition Division of FAO concerning the development of infant foods based upon locally available materials. Such assistance could cover the technological, marketing and nutritional aspects of such foods. The Secretariat of the ACC Sub Committee on Nutrition also had available to it information from the specialized agencies and nutrition units of the UN System which could be made available to member governments.
425. The Delegation of Switzerland informed the Commission that it was submitting new data to the Committee for inclusion in the advisory list for vitamin compounds for foods for infants and children.
Confirmation of Chairmanship
426. The Commission confirmed under Rule IX.10 that the Codex Committee on Foods for Special Dietary Uses should continue to be under the Chairmanship of the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany.
427. The Commission had before it the Report of the Eleventh Session of the Committee on Processed Meat and Poultry Products as contained in ALINORM 81/16 and documents ALINORM 81/37-Part III and LIM 7, containing comments received from Denmark and the Federal Republic of Germany on Annex C entitled “Sampling and Inspection Procedures for Microbiological Examination of Meat Products in Hermetically Sealed Containers” to the Recommended International Code of Hygienic Practice for Processed Meat Products (CAC/RCP 13-1976) at Step 8.
428. The Chairman of the Committee, Mrs Anne Brincker (Denmark), gave an account of the work accomplished by the Committee since the last session of the Commission. She also introduced the various Codes at Steps 8 and 5 of the Procedure and matters arising from the Report of the Codex Committee on Processed Meat and Poultry Products.
429. The Chairman of the Committee reviewed briefly the history of Annex C, (ALINORM 81/16, Appendix II) and informed the Commission that it was not reviewed by the Codex Committee on Food Hygiene at its last session since the detailed documentation was not available in time.
430. The Commission was also informed that while the comments received from Denmark were editorial in nature, the comments from the Federal Republic of Germany to the effect that the product be subjected to microbiological examination in all cases (Section B: non shelf stable meat products, heat treated after packaging), were substantial in nature.
431. Taking into consideration that the sampling and inspection procedures were intended to be used only in cases where the controlling authorities had reason to suspect that the lot contained defectives, it appeared that there was much to commend in the proposal from the Federal Republic of Germany.
432. The Commission noted that the proposals made by the Federal Republic of Germany were new proposals that had not been considered previously by the Committee and that further, the Federal Republic of Germany did not propose any text that could be considered by the Commission.
433. The Commission agreed with the proposal made by the Chairman that Annex C be held at Step 7, that it be referred to the next session of the Codex Committee on Food Hygiene and returned to the Committee on Processed Meat and Poultry Products for re-examination of the two proposals made by Denmark and the Federal Republic of Germany.
Status of Draft Annex C
434. The Commission retained the Draft Annex C at Step 7 of the Codex procedure.
435. The Commission noted that the Committee faced no major issues with the elaboration of the Code, except for fixing a limit for the calcium content of mechanically separated meat, which is put into square brackets.
Status of the Draft Code
436. The Commission advanced the Code to Step 6 of the procedure.
Other Matters arising from the Report of the Eleventh Session of the Committee
437. The Commission was informed that the main reason for the elaboration of a Code of Hygienic Practice for dry and semi-dry sausages was that new production techniques introduced for manufacturing the product might give rise to health hazards because of the short processing times, often combined with higher fermentation temperatures which might result in formation of staphylococcal enterotoxins during the process.
438. The Commission noted that in view of the restricted international trade in the particular type of dry and semi-dry sausages concerned and of the lack of evidence that the products covered by the code were of public health concern, the Committee suspended its work on the elaboration of the Code. The Committee, however, expressed its willingness to continue the development of the Code if there was considerable support to do so.
439. The Commission, noting that there was very little interest among the delegations present for the elaboration of the Code of Hygienic Practice for Dry and Semi-Dry Sausages, confirmed the decision of the Committee to suspend the work on the Code until such time that substantial evidence proved that the Code is important from the point of view of the Codex Alimentarius Commission.
440. The Commission noted that the Committee had agreed to develop guidelines for the use of vegetable proteins in processed meat and poultry products under the Codex Steps Procedure.
441. The Delegation of Norway felt that the development of guidelines for use of vegetable proteins in different commodities might pose a problem if it resulted in the elaboration of different labelling provisions for products containing vegetable proteins, but expressed concern about aspects related to the labelling of products containing vegetable proteins.
442. The Commission agreed with the proposal of the Committee on Processed Meat and Poultry Products to elaborate draft guidelines for use of vegetable protein and instructed the Committee to proceed with this work in close collaboration with the Codex Committee on Vegetable Proteins. The Committee on Vegetable Proteins was developing general guidelines for the use of vegetable proteins in food. The guidelines being developed by Commodity Committees should be consistent with the general guidelines being developed by the Codex Committee on Vegetable Proteins having regard to the specific circumstances of individual products. Any departures from general guidelines would need to be justified. The Commission further considered that the labelling aspects would be important and would have to be endorsed by the Codex Committee on Food Labelling.
443. The Commission noted with satisfaction the close collaboration between the Codex Committee on Processed Meat and Poultry Products and the Codex Committee on Vegetable Proteins.
444. The Delegation of Mexico considered that there was a need to develop similar guidelines for the use of other proteins including such products as milk powder, casein and caseinates in meat and poultry products. The Commission agreed that the Committee should examine the question of whether there is a need for developing such guidelines at a future session.
445. The Commission noted the wish of the Committee to revise the above Code, the provisions of which were derived from the work done in the mid-1960s, and was informed that an ad hoc Working Group had met at WHO Headquarters in March 1981 to initiate the revision. The Commission approved the proposed revision of the Recommended Code of Practice.
Confirmation of Chairmanship
446. The Commission confirmed under Rule IX.10 of the Procedure that the Codex Committee on Processed Meat and Poultry Products should continue to be under the Chairmanship of the Government of Denmark.
447. The Codex Committee on Meat Hygiene held its 4th Session in London from 18 to 22 May 1981. The report of the session was introduced by Ms. S. Cottrell (New Zealand).
Status of the Code
449. The Commission agreed with the recommendation of the Codex Committee on Meat Hygiene and decided to advance the Code of Hygienic Practice for Game to Step 6.
450. The Commission noted that the Committee had developed the draft Code of Practice for Ante-Mortem and Post-Mortem Judgement of Slaughter Animals up to Step 3 at the 4th session of the Committee. The completion of work on the two Codes would probably require two further sessions of the Committee.
Confirmation of Chairmanship
451. The Commission confirmed under Rule IX.10 that the Codex Committee on Meat Hygiene should continue to be under the Chairmanship of the Government of New Zealand.
452. The Commission had before it the Reports of the First and Second Sessions of the Committee (ALINORM 81/29 and 81/29A).
453. Dr. R. W. Weik of the Delegation of the United States introduced the above Reports on behalf of Mr. D.R. Galliart, Chairman of the Codex Committee on Cereals and Cereal Products.
454. The Commission noted that both sessions of the Committee had been very well attended and, in particular, that 17 developing countries had participated at the Second Session.
455. Dr. Weik gave a brief account of the work carried out by the Committee.
456. The Committee had confirmed at its First Session its terms of reference which had been elaborated at the 12th Session of the Commission, namely: to elaborate worldwide standards and/or Codes of practice, as may be appropriate, for cereals and cereal products.
457. One of the major tasks carried out by the Committee at its first session had been the establishment of a programme of work for the Committee. The Committee had agreed, for the time being, to limit its activities to grains and milled grains and to give more consideration to composite products at a future session.
458. The Committee had decided to start its work by elaborating worldwide standards for wheat flour, maize grains and whole and degermed maize meal and grits. The Committee had, however, considered a much wider range of products of importance. On a number of products, including semolina, rolled oats and milled rice, no conclusive decision had been made and additional information in accordance with the Work Priority Criteria had been requested from Governments and Coordinating Committees. The Committee had recognized that several products, such as sorghum, millet and their milled products, although they moved in worldwide trade, were used as an important staple food mainly in the region of Africa. The Committee had therefore recommended to the Coordinating Committee for Africa to consider the development of regional standards for these products. The Commission took note of these decisions. Finally, the Committee had decided not to commence the elaboration of codes of practice or standards for certain other products including wheat grains, rye and rye products, barley and barley products, oats. Details of the programme of work can be found in para. 155 of ALINORM 81/29.
459. Having regard to the importance of the products as staple foods, the Committee had requested member governments to give further consideration to the programme of work of the Committee and to examine and comment on the decisions made so far. The Delegation of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya drew the Commission's attention to the pressing need for the elaboration of a worldwide standard for wheat, and further informed the Commission that barley was also an important food in North African countries and that it was, therefore, in favour of a standard for barley either of regional or worldwide coverage.
460. Several delegations pointed out that it was necessary to reconsider the need for a standard for wheat. The decision of the first session of the Committee not to elaborate such a standard had been made on the request of only a few countries. To consider this matter fully, more detailed information should be provided, including data on different production-, harvest- and storage conditions and on such areas which were important health matters, e.g. pathogenic moulds, etc.
461. The Delegation of Australia, supported by several other delegations, reiterated the view that the Committee should evaluate the data strictly on the basis of the Codex work priority criteria. The delegation also stated that the grain trade was normally well regulated by buyer-seller contracts, by national grain board regulations and by international arrangements such as the FAO promoted Plant Protection Convention. The Delegation of Australia considered that there was scope, if various delegations saw problems in the trade, for a reconsideration of the matter by the Committee. However, countries should be requested to provide specific and full details of actual problems they had experienced, so that the Committee could determine what solutions, if any, were appropriate. The Committee could not legitimately be expected to change its earlier decision if detailed information was not made available to it. Likewise, although standards or codes of practice might be the answer to these problems, it would be pointless to develop them if other solutions, such as greater attention to contracting procedures, were a more appropriate solution. This view was supported by the Delegation of Canada and by several other delegations.
462. The Representative of ISO drew attention to the specification for wheat grains which had been developed in the Sub-Committee on Cereals and Pulses of ISO/TC/34. The Representative of ISO made reference to a policy statement which had been agreed between ISO and Codex to avoid duplication of work. Under this agreement, the Codex Alimentarius Commission would elaborate standards for products intended for human consumption, while ISO would consider specifications for agricultural commodities. The Delegation of Hungary recalled that Hungary provided the Secretariat for ISO/TC/34 and stressed the good cooperation between the two organizations. The Chairman drew the attention of the Commission to a discussion on international cooperation at the Second Session of the Committee which was reflected in paras 26–30 of ALINORM 81/29A. Several delegations underlined the need for international organizations to avoid duplication of work.
463. The Delegation of Thailand supported the view of the Delegation of Australia on trade in grains especially in rice, and drew attention to the work of ISO on a specification for rice which did not cover the agricultural commodity (paddy) rice, but the processed products, including milled rice.
464. A number of delegations were of the opinion that in determining the work programme, the Codex work priority criteria should be equally applied to all commodities. In their view the agreement to elaborate a standard for maize grain justified also the elaboration of a standard for wheat grains which were at least of equal importance to maize.
465. The Secretariat gave a brief summary of the documentation which had been prepared for the two sessions of the Committee, including information both on matters related to work priority criteria and on the activity of other international organizations. The Commission concluded that it was necessary to obtain more detailed information on specific problems and on the requirements of individual countries, in order to review the programme of work of the Committee. The Secretariat was instructed to issue a Circular Letter which should reflect the discussion of the two sessions of the Committee and of the Commission and to request governments to comment thereon and to indicate specific problems and requirements concerning the standardization of cereals and cereal products.
466. The Rapporteur outlined briefly the action taken by the Committee concerning the elaboration of the above standard. He recalled that the Commission, at its 13th Session, had adopted at Step 5 a Regional African Draft Standard for Maize (Corn). The Commission had further decided that the standard for maize should have worldwide coverage and had therefore recommended to the Committee to consider whether the regional African standard was suitable for transformation into a worldwide standard. The Committee had taken over the regional standard and had, after thorough examination at two sessions of the Committee, advanced the amended text to Step 8.
467. It was noted that due to the timing of the sessions, Governments had not had the customary period of time available to submit proposals for Step 8 amendments. The Delegation of Nigeria, supported by the Delegations of Kenya, Spain, Ghana and Switzerland and by the Delegation of the United Kingdom speaking on behalf of the Member States of the EEC, proposed that the standard should not be advanced at this time, in view of the substantial changes which had been made to the text of the standard at the Second Session of the Committee.
468. The Delegation of Switzerland expressed concern about the absence of levels for mycotoxins.
469. The Delegation of Argentina reiterated its comments made at the Second Session of the Committee that Sections 5.3 (a) and (b) as drafted would present problems in worldwide trade, since the requirements concerning absence of microorganisms and toxins derived therefrom were of a general nature and open to interpretation. The delegation proposed to introduce numerical limits and to provide for appropriate supporting methodology. The Delegation of Argentina stated furthermore that the detailed labelling requirements should apply to small packs only and not to sacks, since this might create difficulties in international trade.
Status of the Standard for Maize (Corn)
470. The Commission decided to return the above standard to Step 6 of the Procedure, in order to enable governments to give more consideration to the substantial changes made to the text.
471. The Delegation of Portugal expressed its particular interest in this standard and wished to submit to the Committee a proposal to include in the standard quality characteristics for flours which were related to their end use; e.g. cooking or baking, and some technical comments on certain additives.
Status of the Standard for Wheat Flour
472. The Commission adopted the above standard at Step 5 and advanced it to Step 6 of the Procedure.
473. The Delegation of the United Kingdom expressed the view that the Codex standards for cereals and cereal products should not include, by reference, provisions relating to pesticide residue limits adopted by the Codex Alimentarius Commission. The delegation further pointed out that inclusion of such provisions could lead to confusion concerning the acceptance procedures for pesticide residue limits and those for commodity standards. This view was supported by the Delegation of Spain.
474. The Secretariat pointed out that the “Format for Codex Standards” in the Procedural Manual had foreseen provision by reference for pesticide residues, in commodity standards but it had been the practice in Commodity Committees and the Commission not to do this for the reasons given by the Delegation of the United Kingdom.
475. The Rapporteur informed the Committee that the provision on pesticide residues in the standard for maize had been taken over from the original regional standard for maize. It was pointed out by the Delegation of Ghana that difficulties encountered with pesticide residues in Africa had been the motivating reason to establish the regional standard for maize. The Commission considered that it would be wise to omit such references but, nevertheless, agreed that further government comments were needed on this matter which should be further discussed by the Committee on Cereals and Cereal Products.
476. The Commission recalled that it had agreed earlier in the Session that the Codex Committee on Cereals and Cereal Products should be charged with the responsibility for developing standards for pulses.
477. The Commission decided, therefore, to change the name of the Committee to “Codex Committee on Cereals, Pulses and Legumes” and to amend its terms of reference to read as follows: “to elaborate worldwide standards and/or codes of practice as may be appropriate for cereals, pulses, legumes, and their products.”
478. The Commission agreed that a background document should be prepared, reflecting the information on pulses available, to enable the Committee to extend its programme of work in accordance with its revised terms of reference and to review its work priorities.
479. It was further agreed that the work already undertaken by the UNECE Working Group on Pulses should be taken into account, especially in the preparation of the draft standards. In order to avoid duplication of work, the Commission recommended to the UNECE Secretariat to request member governments to refrain from continuing the work on the ECE recommendations for pulses.
Confirmation of Chairmanship
480. The Commission confirmed under Rule IX.10 that the Codex Committee on Cereals, Pulses and Legumes should continue to be under the Chairmanship of the Government of the United States.
481. The Commission expressed its appreciation to the Government of the United States for having hosted the first two sessions of the Committee in order to advance this important work.
482. The Codex Committee on Vegetable Proteins held its first session in Ottawa, 3–7 November 1980.
483. The Report of the session was introduced by the Chairman, Dr. N.W. Tape (Canada) who reviewed the work programme established by the Committee and the progress made at the first session.
487. The Committee had established two working groups, one to review the adequacy of methods to determine the biological quality of protein and to identify the best available methods of measurement, and another to review methods of analysis of vegetable protein in a mixture with animal protein.
488. The Committee had also agreed that a background paper on the toxicity of Lysino alamine (LAL) should be prepared for the next session of the Committee.
490. The Commission expressed its satisfaction at the Committee's offer to form such a Working Group and noted that a Circular Letter had already been issued inviting governments to make use of the Committee's expertise and to so inform either the Secretariat or the Chairman of the Committee.
491. With regard to the intention of the Committee to elaborate general guidelines for the use of vegetable protein products in food, the Commission noted that work had been in progress for some time within the Codex Committee on Processed Meat and Poultry Products, specifically to prepare draft guidelines for the use of vegetable proteins in meat and poultry. It also noted that other Committees such as the Codex Committee on Fish and Fishery Products might find it necessary to develop guidelines for use in certain products. The Commission agreed that all such guidelines should be prepared in close collaboration and consultation with the Codex Committee on Vegetable Proteins.
Confirmation of Chairmanship
492. The Commission confirmed under Rule IX.10 that the Codex Committee on Vegetable Proteins should continue to be under the Chairmanship of the Government of Canada.
493. The Commission had before it document ALINORM 81/11 and Add. 1 thereto, containing the conclusions of the Codex Committee on Food Additives concerning the food additives included in the standard and comments from governments to the proposal of Ireland to provide for a minimum milk fat content of 5% in products grouping 3 of Section 3.3 of the standard contained in Appendix I to ALINORM 79/11.
Section 4 - Food Additives
494. The Commission noted that the Codex Committee on Food Additives had reconsidered the food additives provided for in the standard and had reconfirmed its previous endorsement (see paras 92–98, ALINORM 81/12). During the discussion of this question the Delegations of the Federal Republic of Germany, France, Poland, Austria, Egypt, Chile, USSR and Italy expressed the view that the list included in the standard was unduly long. The Delegation of Egypt also considered that a food which is consumed by children should not contain synthetic colours or flavours. In the opinion of these delegations the use of many of the food additives included in the standard could not be justified. The Delegations of Belgium and Sweden indicated that, having regard to the list of additives as well as their maximum limits, their countries could only accept the standard with a certain number of specified deviations.
495. The Delegation of the United Kingdom, supported by the Delegations of Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, New Zealand, USA, Finland, Brazil and Denmark pointed out that the arguments made by the previous speakers did not contain any new element which had not been considered by the Commodity Committee and by the Codex Committee on Food Additives. These delegations were of the opinion that the list of food additives represented a compromise and that it should be adopted by the Commission.
496. The Commission noted that the list of food additives included in Codex standards were indicative in the sense that the use of the individual additives was optional. They served to restrict the use of additives to those which had been evaluated from a point of view of safety and the use of which was technologically justified for certain products within the maximum levels specified. Lists of additives in an international standard were bound to be longer than was possible to establish at the national level in order to allow governments a choice from among internationally evaluated substances. The point was also made that it was certainly to be expected that only a very few of the additives would be used in a given product at one time.
497. The Delegation of Finland drew the attention of the Commission to the finding of the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), that Fast Green FCF, included in the standard, had been shown to be a carcinogen and that, therefore, Finland had reservations concerning this colour. The Commission noted that JECFA had this additive under review.
498. The Commission noted the above remarks and decided that the section on food additives as contained in document ALINORM 81/11 should be adopted. It noted that the section could be revised at a future date in the light of the acceptances received.
499. The Commission considered an amendment proposed by Ireland (see para. 500) in the light of government comments. These indicated that while there was no strong objection to the Irish amendment, most of the comments received indicated that there was no support for the amendment.
500. The Delegation of Ireland submitted a Conference Room Document indicating the rationale in putting forward the amendment which proposed the inclusion in Section 3.3 of the standard of a product containing a minimum of 5% butterfat in a mixed fat ice cream. The Conference Room Document also indicated the economic impact which the standard, as drafted, would have on trade in that country. Furthermore, the delegation was strongly of the opinion that the standard for edible ices and ice mixes was defective in a number of ways and that it should be returned to Step 7 for reconsideration. The Delegations of Australia and Canada generally supported this view, and indicated that the present standard was too much of a compromise and that it covered far too many types of products. In their opinion it was very unlikely that the standard would find acceptance by Governments and suggested that it be abandoned, so that other subjects of more importance could be considered.
501. The Commission noted that these arguments had been considered by the Commodity Committee which had ajourned sine die. There seemed to be no advantage to be gained from setting up a special group to reconsider the standard or from holding it in abeyance. The standard contained a number of provisions such as those relating to hygiene, additives and to labelling, which were useful items for international agreement. Furthermore, it was desirable to finalize the standard so as to free resources to be used for other subjects of importance. As regards the amendment proposed by Ireland, the Commission did not adopt it.
Status of the Draft Standard for Edible Ices and Ice Mixes
502. The Commission adopted the Draft Standard for Edible Ices and Ice Mixes at Step 8 of the Procedure for the Elaboration of Worldwide Codex Standards. The Delegations of Australia, Canada and Ireland opposed this decision.
Confirmation of Chairmanship of the Committee
503. The Commission confirmed under Rule IX.10 that the Codex Committee on Edible Ices should continue to be under the Chairmanship of the Government of Sweden.
504. The Commission had before it documents ALINORM 81/37 and Addendum 1.
505. The Chairman of the Committee, Professor Dr. E. Matthey (Switzerland) introduced the above documents which contained a first draft of a standard for acid hydrolyzed vegetable proteins and government comments thereon.
506. The Commission recalled the history of this standard (paras 1–5 of ALINORM 81/32) and noted that the Executive Committee at its 27th Session had decided to request government comments on a first draft of a standard for acid hydrolyzed vegetable proteins (see Appendix I to ALINORM 81/32) to be submitted to this session of the Commission. The Executive Committee had noted with appreciation the offer of the Government of Switzerland to develop the standard within the Codex Committee on Soups and Broths, should the Commission decide to continue work on this standard. The written comments contained in the above documents were not conclusive and it became apparent that it would be appropriate to clarify the scope and to receive more information on the nature of the products covered by the standard. This was especially desirable in order to define which types of products were sold directly to the consumers. Whereas the Delegation of the United Kingdom reiterated the opinion that the products were mostly destined for further processing and hardly moving in international trade, the Delegation of Nigeria indicated that it was not a producer but that there was a steeply increasing consumption of these products and a standard was necessary to protect the consumer.
507. A considerable number of delegations expressed themselves in favour of a standard. A large number of delegations stated that they were not opposed to elaborating the standard, but considered that this matter was of low priority and that more information was needed in accordance with the Codex Work Priority Criteria.
508. Delegations speaking against the development of a standard for acid hydrolyzed proteins, since the work priority criteria could not be complied with, expressed the view that the Commission's efforts should be directed to products of more importance.
509. The Commission decided that more information on hydrolyzed proteins should be requested from governments by Circular Letter, having regard to the views expressed above. The Circular Letter should request also specific comments on the scope of the standard as set forth in Appendix I to ALINORM 81/32. It was hoped that a decision on this matter could be made at the next session of the Commission.
Confirmation of Chairmanship
510. The Commission confirmed under Rule IX.10 that the Codex Committee on Soups and Broths should continue to be under the Chairmanship of the Government of Switzerland. The Commission noted that the Committee had adjourned sine die.
511. The Commission had before it the Report of the 14th Session of the Codex Committee on Cocoa Products and Chocolate (ALINORM 81/10). The Chairman of the Committee, Professor Dr. E. Matthey (Switzerland) introduced the report and reviewed the progress made with regard to the two Draft Standards examined by the Committee, i.e. the Draft Standard for Composite and Filled Chocolate and the Draft Standard for [Composite Cocoa Butter] [Cocoa Butter Confectionery] which would be further considered by the Committee at its next session at Step 6 of the Procedure.
513. The Commission noted that no such meeting of the Working Party would be organized in the foreseeable future and that the Committee had hoped to complete its programme of work at its next session. It was proposed that in these circumstances the Committee should itself endeavour to undertake the amendment and completion of the Draft Standard. A number of producing countries represented at the Commission's session, including Brazil, Cameroon, Ghana, Ivory Coast and Nigeria, supported by the Representative of COPAL, did not agree with the proposal.
514. The Delegation of the Ivory Coast informed the Commission that the question of the Model Ordinance and Code of Practice was a matter which was solely the responsibility of the FAO Secretariat. In fact, FAO had elaborated the Model Ordinance and Code of Practice, which it had submitted to the producer countries. The latter, after application, should inform FAO of their observations in order to have a definitive document established. Meanwhile, the FAO Working Party had ceased its activities, thus suspending the entire procedure for the elaboration of the final document. COPAL had written to FAO so that FAO might re-activate the activities of its Working Party. The request had been supported by the Codex Committee on Cocoa Products and Chocolate at its 14th Session. Consequently the Delegation of the Ivory Coast requested the Commission to await the reply of the FAO Secretariat to the COPAL request. The Delegation of the Ivory Coast considered, furthermore, that for the moment, the Committee did not constitute the appropriate framework for dealing with this question.
515. The Delegation of Cameroon stated that after the meeting of its Working Party, which took place in Paris from 27 to 30 May 1969, FAO had requested its Members to apply the Model Ordinance and Code of Practice on Cocoa Beans, Cocoa Nibs, Cocoa Mass, Cocoa Press Cake, and Cocoa Dust for use in the manufacture of chocolate products. Cameroon had done this, since it had drawn on the Model Ordinance and Code of Practice for the elaboration of its national legislation in this field. However, FAO was to have reconvened its Working Party in 1974, in order to evaluate the application of this draft standard and possibly revise it. Cameroon now requested FAO, through the Codex Alimentarius Commission, to reconvene its Working Party, in order to revise, if possible, its Model Ordinance and Code of Practice, to enable the Codex Committee on Cocoa Products and Chocolate to pursue its work of elaborating a standard for cocoa beans, cocoa nibs, cocoa mass, cocoa press cake, and cocoa dust for use in the manufacture of chocolate products.
516. The Representative of ISO informed the Commission that ISO had already issued a Standard on Specifications for Cocoa Beans (ISO 2451) which had been prepared at the request of FAO.
517. The Commission agreed that work on the Draft Standard should not be pursued at the present time. It was also agreed that the Codex Secretariat should draw COPAL's request to the attention of the competent unit in FAO.
Confirmation of Chairmanship
518. The Commission confirmed under Rule IX.10 that the Codex Committee on Cocoa Products and Chocolate should continue to be under the Chairmanship of the Government of Switzerland.
520. On methods of analysis, the UK Secretariat was still awaiting the results of work on certain methods of analysis being done by ISO, on receipt of which they would produce a paper for comments by Governments.
521. On lead levels, the Codex Committee on Food Additives at its last session had endorsed the limits for lead proposed by the UK Secretariat following consultation. These were 0.5 mg/kg for fructose and 1.0 mg/kg for the other sugars, and had been submitted to the Codex Committee on Food Additives by the 13th Session of the Commission. Although they had endorsed the limits, the Codex Committee on Food Additives thought that they were still too high and that further information on the feasibility of lowering them was required. They had also recommended that details of sufficiently sensitive methods of analysis should be sought. A circular letter (CL 1981/24 (Sugars)) had beein issued in May 1981, requesting comments by 31 October, to enable the UK Secretariat to make an assessment and to present a paper to the next session of the Codex Committee on Food Additives.
522. The Commission heard a progress report from the ISO on the elaboration of methods of analysis.
523. The Delegation of Egypt stated that lead intake had a cumulative effect and expressed the view that even a limit of 1 mg/kg was still too high.
524. The Commission decided to await the outcome of the work on lead levels before publishing any amendments to the standards.
Confirmation of Chairmanship
525. The Commission confirmed under Rule IX.10 that the Codex Committee on Sugars should continue to be under the Chairmanship of the Government of the United Kingdom. It was noted that the Committee would remain adjourned sine die.
Confirmation of Chairmanship of the Committee
526. The Commission confirmed under Rule IX.10 that the Codex Committee on Natural Mineral Waters should continue to be under the Chairmanship of the Government of Switzerland. It noted that the Committee would remain adjourned sine die.
Confirmation of Chairmanship
527. The Commission confirmed under Rule IX.10 that the Codex Committee on Meat should continue to be under the Chairmanship of the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany. It noted that the Committee would remain adjouned sine die.
