4 Addition of vitamins and minerals to
foods
| (25057)
14842/03
COM(03) 671
| Draft Regulation on the additions of vitamins and minerals and of certain other substances to foods.
|
| Legal base | Article 95 EC; co-decision; QMV
|
| Document originated | 10 November 2003
|
| Deposited in Parliament | 19 November 2003
|
| Department | Food Standards Agency
|
| Basis of consideration | EM of 4 December 2003
|
| Previous Committee Report | None
|
| To be discussed in Council | No date set
|
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Not cleared; further information awaited
|
Background
4.1 According to the Commission, vitamins and minerals are added
to food for three purposes —
to restore to the product offered to the consumer nutrients lost
during the various stages of manufacture, to produce substitute
foods which resemble common food in appearance, smell and taste
and nutrititive value, and to fortify or enrich foods. It also
points out that the addition of such nutrients is generally practised
either voluntarily or because of the requirements of national
or Community rules, but that national rules on their voluntary
addition vary widely, to reflect public health considerations
at national or regional level. Because of this, the Commission
says that there is no need either to change existing Community
rules on the addition of nutrients or to harmonise at this stage
existing national rules on their compulsory addition. It has however
sought in this proposal to harmonise the rules on the voluntary
addition of the two nutrients most commonly added —
vitamins and minerals —
a step which it sees as contributing both to the smooth functioning
of the internal market and to consumer protection.
The current proposal
4.2 In introducing its proposal, the Commission points
out that, despite the availability within the Community of a variety
of safe foods at affordable prices, the intake of almost all vitamins
and minerals by one or more groups within the population is, for
a number of reasons, below nationally recommended levels (though
the groups and vitamins for which this is so vary from one Member
State to another). It also recognises that foods to which vitamins
and minerals have been added voluntarily can make a sometimes
significant contribution to reducing the risk of any such deficiencies.
In particular, it sees the key issue as being, not restoration
or achieving the nutritional equivalence of substitute foods (where
it intends to continue to rely on the approach adopted internationally
through the Codex Alimentarius), but the extent of fortification
and enrichment.
4.3 More specifically, it says that the aim should
be to achieve a proportionate response which will on the one hand
avoid unnecessary restrictions, whilst discouraging consumers
from placing undue dietary reliance on fortified foods. However,
the proposal would not — as some consumer organisations
have urged — prevent vitamins and minerals from being added
to products with a high fat, salt or sugar content, preferring
instead to exercise a measure of control over the resultant health
claims made by manufacturers; and, apart from the exceptions listed
below, the Commission has resisted pressure to allow the addition
of vitamins only to those foods in which they are already present.
4.4 The Commission therefore proposes that the Regulation
should:
- define the purposes for which
vitamins and minerals may be added;
- list in an Annex those vitamins and minerals
which may be added, together with permitted vitamin preparations
and minerals salts, and establish a Community Register providing
relevant information;
- lay down certain restrictions as regards the
foods to which vitamins and minerals may be added;
- prohibit the addition of vitamins and minerals
to fresh produce and to drinks with an alcoholic content of more
than 1.2%;
- set criteria for the establishment of maximum
and minimum levels of vitamins and minerals in foods through the
Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health;
- provide for appropriate specific rules on the
labelling, presentation and advertising of products to which vitamins
and minerals have been added; and
- enable Member States to require notification
of the marketing of these products in order to facilitate their
monitoring.
4.5 The proposal would not apply to food supplements,
and it would apply without prejudice to existing legislation on
food for particular nutritional use, novel foods (and food ingredients),
food additives and flavourings, and provisions on wine-making
practices and processes. However, it would introduce powers enabling
action to be taken at Community level to restrict other substances
which may be added to food where there are safety concerns, and
it would permit Community (and, where appropriate, national) provisions
providing for the mandatory addition of vitamins and minerals
to specified foods.
The Government's view
4.6 In her Explanatory Memorandum of 4 December 2003,
the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Public Health at
the Department of Health (Miss Melanie Johnson) says that the
Government accepts that intra-Community trade difficulties suggest
that harmonisation is justified, but that it will need to be convinced
that the proposed controls are a proportionate response. She adds
that it is satisfied that current UK controls are sufficient to
protect consumers, and have allowed the development of a wide
range of fortified foods which, in some cases, make a positive
contribution to public health. She also suggests that the variety
of choice which has been developed in the UK is valued by many
consumers, and that any restrictions would need to be justified
on public health grounds. Also, although current UK practice
—
including the mandatory fortification of foods such as margarine
and flour —
appears to be unaffected by the conditions set out in the proposal,
some other Member States are known to favour a more restrictive
approach based on supposed nutritional need.
4.7 The Minister suggests that the labelling requirement
proposed would impose a cost of about £1,000 per affected
product on businesses, but that these would be offset by a suitable
transitional period. She adds that there would also be costs arising
from the reformulation of products, and that, although it is not
possible at present to provide a Regulatory Impact Assessment,
one is in preparation and will be submitted as soon as possible.
Conclusion
4.8 Before we take a firm view on this proposal,
we think it sensible to await the Regulatory Impact Assessment
which the Minister has promised, though we note the reservations
she has expressed over the proportionality of the controls envisaged.
In the meantime, we are drawing the proposal to the attention
of the House.
|
