NEW RULE FOR FOOD AND NUTRITIONAL IN THE EUROPEAN UNION.

This is main hall of the European Parliament where EU regulate new Regulation and the buliding is located in Brusells City of Belgium.

The European Parliament (EP) has voted in favour of strengthening the European Union's draft regulation on food and nutritional labeling which was proposed by European Commission in 2008. With this, it will be mandatory to:

I. Label nutrition details:

•      Quantities of fat, saturates, sugar, salt and energy, to be accompanied by

        guideline on daily amounts (expressed with per 100g or per 100ml values).

•      Details of protein, fibres and transfats.

ii. Label country of origin for:

•     all meat, poultry, dairy  products  and  other single-ingredient products (which earlier were only compulsory for certain foods, such as beef, honey, olive oil and fresh fruit and vegetables).

•     Meat, poultry and fish when used as an ingredient in processed food (subject to an impact assessment).

•     Meat labels should indicate where the animal was born, reared and slaughtered. It should also indicate meat from slaughter without stunning (according to certain religious traditions).

The European Parliament has also agreed to exclude the labeling rules on:

        •      Non pre-packed food, such as meat from a butcher.

       
        •      Handcrafted food products made by micro-enterprises.

        
        •     Alcoholic drinks i.e. beer, wine and spirits. However, it is mandatory to label mixed alcoholic drinks.

The draft regulation is still subject to the agreement of EU head of governments (European Council), which is expected to deliberate on the proposal in February 2011.

Once adopted, food producers will have 3 years grace period to comply with the mandatory labeling requirements. However, SMEs with fewer than 100 employees and annual turnover under EUR5 million are given a longer period to comply (five years).

Relating to this draft regulation, I wish to highlight a memorandum released by the European Association of Zoos and Aquaria (EAZA), an association representing 324 zoos and aquaria institutions from 35 European countries released on 19 May 2010. In this memorandum, EAZA has singled out on palm oil and insisted that mandatory labeling be imposed on food products containing palm oil. EAZA argued that this is to inform EU consumers of the potential environmental, social and ethical impacts of their purchases given the alleged adverse impact of oil palm plantations (including endangering species such as orang-utan).

Specific proposals made by EAZA:

        
•     Clear labeling of palm oil or palm kernel oil contents in food products sold in the EU;

•    Mandatory labelling using phrases such as ‘May contain products derived from oil palm’ or ‘May contain palm oil’ for products that knowingly contain palm oil or where it cannot be guaranteed that palm oil is not included in the product;

•   additional mandatory element to indicate whether palm oil used is from certified sustainable sources or is from unsustainable sources;

•   to develop ‘Orang-utan friendly’ optional labeling scheme.

General Comments

The European Parliament has endorsed almost all the provisions in the draft regulation except for the three ‘traffic light colour coding’ for certain processed food and soft drinks (as advocated by the UK) since this will be too onerous on businesses.

Although claiming that the labeling requirement is important to address increasing health issues and obesity among EU’s citizens, this is however, questionable. The wider ruling to indicate the ‘country of origin’ to a certain extent can be seen as a protectionist stance especially when most of the members of EP strongly said that this is to provide consumers with informed choices i.e. of those products produced in third countries.

The main entrance to the main hall of the European Parliament in Brussels City of Belgium, Europe.

The requirement to indicate methods of slaughtering on meat label may impact exports of halal meat products (such as in processed food) into the EU market. There may be a linkage between this proposal and DG Trade’s insistence that animal welfare element be included in the Malaysia-EU FTA during the recent scoping discussion. We may wish to seek further clarifications from the EU side on this issue.


There is still possibility for EAZA to lobby for changes in the draft regulation as long as it is not adopted. As 95% of our palm oil is used in sectors other than bio fuel (including food), we have to be concerned of any negative proposals on palm oil. MPOB and MPOC Brussels are also aware of this memorandum.

 

Salam…………………………………………………………..