|
EU
Information >>
EU Activities >>>
Food Safety |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consumer confidence in
the safety of food products has sometimes been shaken in
recent years by the cumulative impacts of food-related health
crises. Responding to the challenge, the European Union has
put in place a comprehensive strategy to restore people’s
belief in the safety of their food “from the farm to the
fork”. |
|
|
There are three pillars to this strategy:
- legislation on the safety of food
and animal feed;
- sound scientific advice on which
to base decisions;
- enforcement and control.
The general principles of food safety are in a Regulation
adopted in 2002 and often known as the General Food Law. This
thoroughly overhauled EU food safety legislation, with a new
emphasis on feed because feed contamination has been at the
root of all major food scares of the last few years. Under
this law, it became compulsory from 1 January 2005 for food
and feed businesses to guarantee that all foodstuffs, animal
feed and feed ingredients are traceable right through the food
chain. Separate, updated hygiene rules came into effect on 1
January 2006.
The General Food Law is supplemented by targeted
legislation on a raft of food safety issues, such as use of
pesticides, food supplements, colourings, antibiotics and
hormones in food production, and products in contact with
foodstuffs, such as packaging; and by stringent procedures on
release, marketing, labelling and traceability of crops and
foodstuffs containing genetically modified organisms (GMOs).
The basic rules apply to all food and feed. In addition, there
are targeted rules for products ranging from meat to gelatin,
and from dairy products to frogs' legs.
EU responsibility extends also to the welfare of livestock
on the farm and during transport in the interests of common
high standards, disease prevention and keeping track of
animals across the single market. The EU facilitates the
movement of animals for trade, providing animal welfare
standards are met. The EU ‘pet passport’ scheme makes it
easier to take domestic pets on holiday while guaranteeing
that precautions are taken against spreading disease. The EU
fights animal disease by funding research and through common
disease prevention measures. If there are disease outbreaks
nevertheless, the European Commission oversees measures to
protect public health. |
|
[
TOP ] |
|
In order to spot food and feed risks effectively and nip
problems in the bud, the EU operates a rapid alert system.
Every EU government has an early warning system when feed or
food could be unsafe and therefore expose consumers to the
risks of illnesses such as salmonella. It alerts the
Commission, which is the hub of an EU-wide notification
system.
Warning bells also sound when banned substances are
identified or legal limits for high-risk substances have been
exceeded. These substances may be veterinary medicine
residues, food colourings known to be carcinogenic or
naturally occurring toxic moulds. The system deals with
several hundred alerts on immediate risks each year.
What happens will depend on the type of risk. It may be
enough to stop a single batch, or it may be necessary to stop
all shipments of a particular product from the farm, factory
or port of entry. Products already in warehouses and shops may
be recalled. Sometimes every shipment from one suspect source
is tested for some months. In emergencies, the European
Commission can step in directly to protect public health
rather than waiting to consult EU governments. |
|
[
TOP ] |
|
Science is the essential foundation on which the EU bases
its decisions on any part of the food chain. The European Food
Safety Authority (EFSA) in Parma, Italy, plays a central role
in this. EFSA has a wide brief. It can look into all stages of
food production and supply, from primary production to the
safety of animal feed through to the supply of food to
consumers. Its brief also extends to the properties of
non-food and feed GMOs and to nutrition issues.
EFSA provides the European Commission with independent,
scientific advice that is also made public to enable it to be
fully open to scrutiny. EFSA provides input when legislation
is being drafted and advice when policymakers are dealing with
a food scare, like ‘mad cow disease’, dioxin in milk or avian
influenza. In deciding what to do, the Commission applies the
precautionary principle. In other words, it will act without
waiting for scientific certainty if the scientists say there
is at least a potential danger.
Legislation is pointless if it is not enforced. The
Commission enforces EU feed and food law by checking that EU
legislation has been properly incorporated into member state
law, by double-checking compliance through reports from member
states and other countries, and through on-the-spot
inspections in the EU and outside.
Inspections are the job of the Commission’s Food &
Veterinary Office (FVO) based at Grange in Ireland. The FVO
can check individual food production plants, but its main task
is to check that EU governments and those of other countries
have the necessary machinery for checking that their own food
producers are sticking to the safety standards.
New rules which took effect on 1 January 2006 streamline
controls across the EU and put more emphasis on relating
checks to likely risk. The European Commission will monitor
whether EU governments are running their control systems
effectively. Penalties for breaching the law become more
severe in many cases. |
|
[
TOP ] |
|
It is not enough for food to be safe: consumers are
entitled to know what they are buying and that it meets their
needs. EU food labelling rules have existed for many years,
but they are constantly being updated. As a result, consumers
will in future be able more readily to identify ingredients to
which they may be allergic. Clear definitions identical across
the EU are under discussion for the use of terms like ‘low
fat’ and ‘high fibre’.
Preserving diversity
While the framework for food safety is a common one, it
accommodates diversity. The EU takes great care in designing
the rules to ensure that traditional foods are not forced off
the market by its food standards, that the rules leave room
for quality improvements, that innovation is not stifled, and
that variety and choice are not curtailed. |
|
[
TOP ] |
|
|
|
|