5. FOOD HYGIENE: OFFICIAL CONTROLS ON
PRODUCTS OF ANIMAL ORIGIN INTENDED FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION
| (23671)
10987/02
COM(02) 377
| Draft Regulation laying down specific rules for the organisation of official controls on products of animal origin intended for human consumption.
|
| Legal base: | Article 152 (4)(b) EC; co-decision; qualified majority voting
|
| |
| Document originated: | 11 July 2002
|
| Deposited in Parliament: | 19 July 2002
|
| Department: | Food Standards Agency
|
| Basis of consideration: | EM of 19 August 2002
|
| Previous Committee Report: | None; but see footnote 19
|
| To be discussed in Council: | No date set
|
| Committee's assessment: | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision: | Not cleared
|
Background
5.1
According to the Commission, there are at present 17 Directives
dealing in one way or another with food hygiene, which have gradually
developed since 1964 in response to the needs of the internal
market, but which take into account also the need for a high level
of consumer protection. The Commission considered that this multiplicity
of measures, the inclusion of provisions covering not only hygiene
but also animal health and official controls, and the existence
of different hygiene regimes for products of animal origin and
other products, had led to considerable confusion. Consequently,
as foreshadowed in the White Paper[18]
it produced at the beginning of 2000, it proposed[19]
in July of that year that the existing requirements should be
recast, and, in the process, aspects of food hygiene separated
from animal health and control issues.
5.2
More specifically, it proposed that the existing Directives should
be repealed and replaced by four new Regulations, dealing separately
with:
— the hygiene of all foodstuffs;
— specific hygiene rules for food of animal origin;
— detailed rules for the organisation of official controls
on products of animal origin intended for human consumption;
— the animal health rules governing the production,
placing on the market and importation of products of animal origin
intended for human consumption.
5.3
The ways in which it proposed to do this were set out at some
length in our predecessors' Report of 17 January 2001, in the
light of which they recommended the proposals for debate in European
Standing Committee C. Also, although they said that they hoped
the debate would take place in good time for the House to make
a meaningful contribution to what promised to be a lengthy process
of negotiation in Brussels, they suggested that it might be sensible
to delay the debate until the results of the consultation exercise
launched by the Government were available, and there had been
an opportunity for it to update its two initial Regulatory Impact
Assessments. In the event, the debate was held on 24 April 2002,
following the provision of this additional information.
5.4
In the meantime, however, the Commission had produced in December
2001 a Communication[20],
pointing out that, since it made its original proposals, new
scientific evidence has become available, particularly on issues
relating to meat safety. As this required a fundamental revision
of the third part of its earlier proposal (on the health rules
applying to official controls on products of animal origin intended
for human consumption), it intended to withdraw that part of the
proposal, and to replace it at a later date by a new proposal.
The current proposal
5.5
The Commission's revised proposals are set out in this document,
and the major part covers the detailed rules for the conduct of
meat hygiene controls, and in particular those governing the tasks
to be carried out by official veterinary surgeons, auxiliaries
and other staff in meat plants. Its main effect is to change
the present supervisory role of officials to one of auditing the
application by operators of HACCP[21]-based
programmes, but it also introduces inspection procedures which
place more emphasis on the health status of the animals to be
slaughtered and seeks to limit unnecessary post-mortem procedures
which may result in contamination of meat. In the process, it
would make a number of detailed changes, as follows:
— the requirement for the Official Veterinarian always
to be present at post-mortem inspection would be removed for small
red-meat slaughterhouses and game meat processing plants, and
for all poultry meat slaughterhouses;
— the requirement for a daily visit to cutting premises,
which in the case of red meat must currently be made by an Official
Veterinarian, would be replaced by the need for a visit at least
once a week by an Official Veterinarian or a meat inspector acting
under his responsibility;
— plant employees would in certain circumstances be
able to assist Official Veterinarians in carrying out their duties,
including post-mortem inspection, in Member States which have
had at least five years successful experience in the use of such
employees for this purpose, and where the plant operator can demonstrate
the HACCP-based procedures have been carried out successfully
in the plant for al least 12 months.
5.6
In addition, the proposal sets out the rules for the production
of non-meat products. In the case of milk and dairy products
and fishery products, the controls proposed would be similar to
those at present. The main changes would arise on live bivalve
molluscs, where testing for biotoxins would have to be weekly,
as compared with the fortnightly or monthly tests currently carried
out in the UK.
The Government's view
5.7
In her Explanatory Memorandum of 19 August 2002, the Parliamentary
Under-Secretary of State for Public Health at the Department of
Health (Ms Hazel Blears) says that, in many respects, the proposal
would simply consolidate requirements currently contained in a
number of directives, but that, together with the rest of the
package, it would change the emphasis of official controls on
meat production to place the responsibility for producing safe
food more clearly on the business operator. She also says that
it would better reflect the importance of a risk-based and integrated
farm-to-fork approach to food safety.
5.8
However, the Minister adds that the Commission is currently preparing
a proposal for legislation laying down the overarching principles
governing official feed and food controls, which will in particular
lay down how the new requirements on hygiene should be financed.
This in turn would have implications for any measures adopted
under the current document, and is thus relevant to the initial
Regulatory Impact Assessment attached to the Minister's Explanatory
Memorandum. The latter suggests that there ought not to be any
significant changes to the overall supervisory burden so far as
meat plants are concerned, or in the case of dairy and fishery
products, and that the effect on the 33,000 food businesses in
the UK — though still being estimated — should be
relatively small. However, the Minister suggests that the additional
testing requirements for molluscs could add about £2 million
a year to the overall costs, and that the increase in testing
rates proposed is neither necessary nor desirable. Consequently,
the UK intends to argue against that part of the proposal, and
it also wishes to clarify in the case of meat controls whether
certain tasks assigned to the official inspection team might not
sit more appropriately with the plant operator.
Conclusion
5.9
We have noted the Minister's comments on this proposal, and
that she will be providing an updated Regulatory Impact Assessment
as the negotiations progress. We therefore think it would be sensible
to await such an Assessment before taking a final view on this
proposal, particularly as it would seem that its application could
be affected by a further proposal, currently being prepared, dealing
with the overarching principles governing official feed and food
controls, including how any new requirements should be financed.
In view of this possible connection, we would be glad if the
Minister could keep us informed of the likely timing of such a
proposal.
18 (20875) 5761/00; see HC 23-x (1999-2000), paragraph
2 (1 March 2000). Back
19
(21499) 10427/00; see HC 28-iii (2000-01), paragraph 1 (17 January
2001) and HC 152-xxv (2001-02), paragraph 1 (23 April 2002) .
Official Report, European Standing Committee C, 24 April
2002. Back
20
(23102) 15475/01; see HC 152-xx (2001-02), paragraph 2 (6 March
2002). Back
21
Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points. Back
| 
