MARKETING OF COMPOUND ANIMAL FEED
(20912)
5247/00
COM(99) 744
|
Draft Directive amending Directive 79/373/EEC on the marketing of
compound feedingstuffs.
|
| Legal base: |
Article 152 EC; co-decision; qualified majority voting
|
| |
| Department: |
Agriculture, Fisheries and Food
|
| Basis of consideration:
| Minister's letter of 28 March 2000
|
| Previous Committee Report:
| HC 23-ix (1999-2000), paragraph 3 (16 February 2000)
|
| To be discussed in Council:
| Following the Opinion of the European Parliament
|
| Committee's assessment:
| Politically important |
| Committee's decision:
| Cleared |
Background
27.1 Council Directive 79/373/EEC lays down
certain conditions on the labelling of compound feedingstuffs
to ensure that stock farmers have objective and accurate information
on the composition of the material they feed to their stock. One
of its provisions requires manufacturers of such feedingstuffs
to list the ingredients of compound feed, in descending order
of weight, either by specific ingredient or by category, though,
since 1997, any meat material still permitted has to be declared
in full. However, the Commission has recently proposed that, for
farm animal feed, the category option should be removed, and that
manufacturers of such feed should be required to declare the amount
of each ingredient in terms of percentage by weight (an "open
declaration"). However, in response to manufacturers' concerns
about the need for frequent label changes if flexibility in the
use of feed material is to be maintained, the Commission has proposed
a separate label or document specifically for the "open declaration"
of ingredients.
27.2 As we noted in our Report of 16 February
2000, the Government supports the removal of the category option
for the declaration of ingredients, but is concerned that the
"open declaration", which is not a requirement for human
food, would place an additional burden on manufacturers and enforcement
authorities, without providing any meaningful information. It
is therefore in favour of an optional declaration. We in turn
expressed some concern that this might weaken the impact of the
Directive, and we asked the Government to spell out more fully
why it favours that approach.
Minister's letter of 28 March 2000
27.3 In her letter of 28 March 2000, the
Minister of State (Lords) at the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries
and Food (Baroness Hayman) says that the reasons for opposing
mandatory percentage declaration remain those set out in the previous
paragraph, but that there is also concern among feed manufacturers
that it would lead to feed formulae resulting from their own research
and development becoming available to established competitors
and others. She suggests that the net effect of this would be
to further reduce manufacturers' profit margins, when there have
been no calls from farming organisations for such information.
She goes on to say that an optional approach would allow companies
to declare ingredients by percentage if they wished, and that
farmers could still request such details from the feed compounders,
whom MAFF understands are willing to divulge the information in
a way which does not threaten widespread dissemination of research-sensitive
formulae. Finally, the Minister points out that a majority of
Member States are opposed to compulsory percentage declaration,
and that, of the various compromises explored (including making
such declarations mandatory only for "sensitive" materials,
or the introduction of percentage bands), permitting percentage
declarations on a voluntary basis seems the most likely outcome.
27.4 On an entirely separate point, our
Report of 16 February also noted that, although the Commission
has proposed that Article 152 should be the legal base, the UK
was opposed to this, on the grounds that the objective of the
measure is consumer information, not public health. In her latest
letter, the Minister says that this view is shared by a majority
of Member States, but that it is unlikely the necessary unanimity
will be obtained to justify a change to Article 37.
Conclusion
27.5 We are grateful to the Minister
for this further information, and, whilst we still have some reservations
over the idea of optional declarations, we do not intend to pursue
the point further. We are therefore clearing the document.
|
