WRITTEN QUESTION E-1534/99 by Jan Mulder (ELDR) to the Council. Application of Regulation 258/97 (novel foods and novel food ingredients).
C 170 E/32 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 20. 6. 2000 As regards the limit values for dioxins in food, the Commission began an in-depth study of food contamination levels ascertained in several Member States in June 1998. This study belongs in the framework of the scientific cooperation programme between the Member States (SCOOP). The preliminary results of this study, which should be available very shortly, as well as the results of work done at the Joint Research Centre and the Institute for Reference Materials and Measurements (IRMM) should help assess the risk and will therefore be the basis for further reflection. Pending the availability of information allowing it to pronounce on the limit values for dioxins in food, the Commission is relying on the scientific assessment made by the World Health Organisation (WHO), which recommends a tolerable daily intake (TDI) of 1 to 4 picograms per kilogram body weight for dioxins. In laying down this level the WHO wanted to safeguard human health as much as possible while acknowl- edging the existence of a ábackground levelí of dioxins in all industrialised countries. Until 1999 the surveillance plans put in place in these countries, and notably the Member States, were focused on keeping contaminated milk and milk products off the shelves. The Commission will propose to the Member States to test all meat, fish and derived products for dioxins and PCBs as from 2000. (2000/C 170 E/032) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1534/99 by Jan Mulder (ELDR) to the Council (8 September 1999) Subject: Application of Regulation 258/97 (novel foods and novel food ingredients) As the Council will be aware, a number of products (including margarine, halvarine and cheese) to which stanols have been added to reduce cholesterol levels have recently been marketed in the United Kingdom under the trade name Benecolí. The manufacturer of these new products refers to the authorisation previously granted and the marketing in Finland of a margarine product also with added stanols, as a result of which, it claims, Regulation 258/97 (1) (novel foods and novel food ingredients) does not apply. Does the Council consider that the Commission, 1. in assessing products previously marketed and which are covered by Regulation 258/97, should be aware of the content and scope of the authorisation granted in the Member State in question? Is there a difference depending on whether the authorisation relates to a product or to an ingredient? Can the Council investigate whether the Commission, 2. in assessing whether Regulation 258/97 applies to the original Benecol margarine product or the cholesterol-reducing ingredient, had the authorisation at its disposal? What information did the authorisation contain concerning the difference between product and ingredient? 3. What quantitative criteria is the marketing of a given product required to meet in order for Regulation 258/97 not to apply because the product or ingredient has been used for human consumption áto a significant degreeí within the Community? 4. What qualitative criteria is a product required to meet if, on the basis of the previous marketing of a product, Regulation 258/97 does not apply to it? Is this product required to have the same composition as the product which has been marketed áto a significant degreeí or may the composition be modified, and if so, to what extent? May the ingredient occurring in the original product be included in other products without Regulation 258/97 applying? What criteria should be used to answer these questions? 5. Does the Council consider that the Commission can investigate to what extent the margarine, halvarine and cheese products currently being marketed in the UK differ from the original margarine product? If not, under what obligation is the Commission to investigate? 6. Can the Council indicate whether the Commission has been asked ü formally or informally ü for an opinion on whether Regulation 258/97 does not apply to the new Benecol products? If so, what was this opinion and on what was it based? (1) OJ L 43, 14. 2. 1997, p. 1. 20. 6. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 170 E/33 Reply (2 December 1999) The Council would remind the Honourable Member that the Treaty of Amsterdam confirmed that consumer policy is an area to which the European Community can and must bring added value. Article 153(1) of the Treaty establishing the European Community defines the Communityís objectives in that connection, in particular having regard to its links with health policy and with promoting the right of consumers to information. In that context, and more particularly with respect to the questions raised, the Council would inform the Honourable Member that Regulation No 258/97 applies to foods and food ingredients placed on the market before it entered into force only if they áhave not hitherto been used for human consumption to a significant degree within the Communityí In such cases, the initial assessment procedure laid down in Article 6 applies. (Article 1(2) of the Regulation). It is for the Commission, and more particularly the Standing Committee for Foodstuffs (cf. Article 1(3) of the Regulation), to determine by committee procedure whether a type of food or food ingredient falls within the scope of the Regulation, and to lay down (in principle on a case-by-case basis) the qualitative criteria attached to each such type of food or food ingredient in order to determine whether it is covered by the Regulation. It should also be emphasised that Article 1 of Regulation No 258/97 makes no distinction between foods and food ingredients, and this applies in particular when it comes to identifying the content and scope of approval in the Member State concerned. Finally, the Council would suggest that the Honourable Member contact the Commission directly regarding those questions which have not been answered, as they are within its field of competence. (2000/C 170 E/033) WRITTEN QUESTION P-1537/99 by Carmen Fraga EstØvez (PPE-DE) to the Commission (1 September 1999) Subject: Compliance with Regulation (EC) 1239/98 outlawing fishing with driftnets Regulation (EC) 1239/98 of 8 June 1998 (1) amending Regulation (EC) 0894/97 laying down certain technical measures for the conservation of fishery resources outlaws the use of driftnets by Community vessels, as of 1 January 2002. Nonetheless, the Regulation authorises the phasing-out of driftnets as of 1998: Article 1(3) states that in 1998 the maximum number of vessels which may be authorised by a Member State to carry on board or fish with one or more driftnets shall not exceed 60 % of the number of vessels which used one or more driftnets over the period 1995-1997. The second fishing season for the longfinned tuna (Thunnus alalunga) since the Regulation came into force has already started. In view of this, does the Commission consider the situation to be satisfactory as regards the two fishing seasons thus far? What is the Commissionís evaluation of the degree of compliance with the Regulation by the fleets concerned? (1) OJ L 171, 17. 6. 1998, p. 1. (2000/C 170 E/034) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1561/99 by Carmen Fraga EstØvez (PPE-DE) to the Commission (1 September 1999) Subject: List of vessels that have stopped using drift-nets in compliance with Regulation (EC) 1239/98 Council Regulation (EC) 1239/98 (1) of 8 June 1998 amending Regulation (EC) 0894/97 laying down fishery resources, bans the use of drift-nets by certain technical measures for the conservation of