MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE OF THE CZECH REPUBLIC Jindřich Fialka Director of the Food Production and Legislation Department Prague, June, 2006 Ref. No 23742/2006-17420 Dear Sir or Madam, The Czech Republic would like to submit its comments to the DG SANCO Consultative Document Labelling: Competitiveness, Consumer Information and Better Regulation for the EU. We are aware of the deadline of 16 th June 2006, however, for technical reasons we were not able to meet it and we apologize for delay in sending our comments. Yours faithfully DG Health and Consumer Protection Directorate E B-1049 Brussels SANCO-LABELLING@ec.europa.eu SANCO-LABELLING@cec.eu.int
Revision of horizontal requirements on food labelling Comments of the Czech Republic to the discussion paper General The Czech Republic welcomes the intention of the European Commission to revise requirements on food labelling at Community level since food labelling represents the basic and traditional communication tool between industry and consumers. From the legal point of view food labelling is a very complicated area and current legislation does not correspond neither with technological progress in food production nor with new means of communication. The basic aims is rationalization and simplification of food legislation, and even though the first intention was to deal with horizontal requirements only, the above aims cannot not be achieved without a wider approach, i.e. and all pieces of legislation setting other requirements on food labelling being taken into account. Consumers consider existing food labelling incomprehensible and unclear but at the same time they paradoxically require more information, which, however, contrasts with outcomes of consumers surveys showing that only a small percentage of consumers is interested in food labelling. On the other hand, food production is getting more complex and the share of processed products on the market is increasing and as a consequence the amount of information on food packages is growing, nevertheless due to space constraints of packages this is unsustainable. Thus future requirements must be a balance between the volume and kind of information and their intelligibility. It will be necessary to consider very carefully the impact on food business operators, particularly on small and medium sized ones, and the new rules should not inhibit economic and technological development. It will also be important to consider the long-term perspective of future legislation in order to decrease possible amendments to a minimum and so not to create additional burdens for industry in the light of Lisbon strategy. Structure of the legislation The current structure of legislation on food labelling is very compound and, in some cases, confusing. There is quite a lot of requirements dispersed in many pieces of legislation of different legal power, where some stipulations leave room for interpretation, and mandatory and voluntary information is mixed up. The consequence of this is inconsistency in practical implementation and unequal conditions for the operators, and it requires to elaborate additional guidelines for practical implementation, interpretation guidelines, which, however, can differ according to approaches applied in individual Member States. The Czech Republic prefers the form of regulation but at the same time we realize that any requirement on one single piece of horizontal legislation applicable to all foodstuffs has to be carefully considered. Even if we prefer one comprehensive legislation in terms of simplification, we do not think that such an approach will be possible, and some specific requirements will have to be set up by vertical legislation. The future regulation should be accompanied by recommendations and/or guidelines for interpretation, which could contain practical examples and include disputable cases, although their number should be restricted. At EC level responsibility for food labelling is shared by more Directors General and this causes requirements on labelling to be in some cases repetitive or ambiguous. Therefore it would be appropriate to focus on improving coordination in food labelling at and such a process could be similar to the mechanism of approval of requirements on food labelling applied in Codex Alimentarius where Codex Committee on Food labelling is responsible for food labelling and has to approve all provisions related to labelling and so the consistent approach is guaranteed in Codex standards. Such a body at EC level could be established as a section for food labelling under
SCoFAH, which would deal with all issues related to food labelling and would be responsible for interpretation of rules on food labelling. Unfortunately there are different opinions even among working groups or sections at DG SANCO and experts on labelling do not participate in all meetings. This could be illustrated by the ongoing discussion on the draft Regulation on spirit drinks under responsibility of DG AGRI dealing with labelling requirements, which are subjected to substantial objections submitted by Members States. The issue of mandatory and voluntary information should also be discussed and the base for it can be setting some categories of information. The first category would contain information which is essential for product identification by an average consumer and thus it must be put on labels (for example name of product, name of manufacturer, safe use such home preparation or storage), information important for consumers choice (such as weight or volume, ingredients), shelf-life or best before and simple identification of a product (such as brand name, trade mark). Information, which is also important but has no immediate influence on consumers choice, should be included in the second category and could be communicated in a different way, for example by means of information leaflets or brochures, websites, or such information could be part of, for example, Codes of Practice. Therefore it will be necessary to identify appropriate communication channels and their availability. Both categories should be clearly defined in legislation with a view to create uniform presentation, which will be advantageous to consumers and, at the same time, will prevent unfair competition. With regard to the purpose of this paper we do not think it necessary to deal with other details since these should be discussed later. Scope of legislation We believe that new legislation on food labelling should cover all foodstuffs, especially in reference to the basic food law (Regulation No 178/2002), which defines foodstuffs, and it should be consistent with other food legislation. Requirements should be stipulated generally, however, allowing for some exceptions, for example in catering. This is also the case of non-packaged foodstuffs which are offered to consumers and consumers shall be informed about certain characteristics when buying such foodstuffs. We realize that currently there is no definition of nonpackaged foodstuffs at Community level but there will be an opportunity to discuss a potential definition if new legislation is drafted. It is necessary to bear in mind that not all commodities and foodstuffs are regulated at Community level and a number of foodstuffs fall into the so-called the non-harmonized area, where Member States are empowered to set up their own rules. And even in the future it is impossible to cover all foodstuffs by Community legislation as concerns for example traditional specialities or regional products (for example meat products). However, it is possible to stipulate requirements on food labelling which can also protect national or regional interests. We also believe that it would be useful to discuss the issue of advertising, trade marks, brand names and geographical indications since they directly relate to food labelling and moreover this information will probably be significant both for industry and for consumers choice. We witness for unfair competition in advertising of foodstuffs where some advertising flashes or/and slogans are apparently confusing and the often misuse can be seen, for example, in supply lists of business chains. We also assume that it is necessary to remove some exceptions permitted by current legislation. We support deletion of the derogation for spirit drinks not to declare their composition as there is no clear justification for a different treatment in this specific case. Together with the range of information, the issue of small sized packages, labels, group packages and labelling of reused containers for non-packaged foodstuffs and information in documents accompanying foodstuffs (for example invoices, delivery notes) should be examined.
Provisions concerning some compulsory information It is difficult to specify all questionable points but the most frequently mentioned ones are: Data marked by an asterisk referring to other information at a different place on the package More specific labelling of allergens - current indication depends on the approach of individual operators. Even if it is possible to indicate allergens in the list of ingredients, they are often highlighted separately and statements such as it may contain, or traces of are confusing for consumers, however, such statements are legitimate according to the existing rules. List of ingredients is the object of consumers and operators attention and a number of indicated ingredients is increasing in connection with the growing share of processed products on the market. Consumers confirm that information about ingredients is unintelligible and thus useless, on the other hand, the existing rules are unclear and burdening for industry. We also support discussion on QUID and quantity of ingredients appearing in the name of products or emphasising on the labelling in words, pictures or graphics is useful information for consumers but such information, whether put on labels or not, can influence competition on the market. For example there are several fish products sold under the name fish fingers but each product contains different proportion of fish meat but only its price is usually stressed, without any relation to meat content, which should be considered as unfair business practice. We would recommend to examine the issue of labelling of quantities and their potential derogations. Labelling of additives and flavourings should be examined since there are also inconsistencies and room for interpretation (for example the use of term smoked ) The terms shelf-life, durability and best before should also be clarified and their interpretation should be unified as well. Labelling of lots should be discussed since this obligation was justifiable before implementation of systems of traceability, whereas currently this rule is perceived as a restrictive measure. Alcoholic beverages The derogation for alcoholic drinks containing more than 1,2% by volume of alcohol is still applicable and we are of the opinion that it should be removed. Spirits containing more than 15% by volume of alcohol are described and labelled according to vertical legislation which is now under revision, however, revised rules do not deal with labelling of ingredients in general and it is unclear whether this issue will be included in the revision of horizontal legislation. The new draft contains a number of requirements which should be considered at future revision of horizontal legislation on food labelling, for example to provide consumers with information by other means than labels. In addition to spirits containing more than 15% by volume of alcohol the issue of alcohol drinks with lower content of alcohol should be discussed. It would be useful to include discussion on beer labelling and labelling of wine and wine-based drinks, which is covered by separate legislation, however, duplicate requirements on labelling such as labelling of allergens should be examined. Voluntary information In addition to categories of information mentioned in Scope of legislation, which has to be easily accessible to consumers, there is, and always will be, a category of voluntary information which can be divided into two categories. The first category comprises information having impact, for example, on public health or distinguishing a particular product from other similar products and especially nutrition and health
claims or nutritional labelling should be emphasized. Although this information is voluntary, its presentation is covered by Community legislation since this kind of information is important not only for consumers, but also for commercial purposes and therefore it is necessary to set up clear rules for presentation to ensure fair competition on the market. The second category includes marketing information, which is in fact advertising or sales promotion and there is no need for binding regulation. Such kind of information can be found on packages even today (for example try our other products or suggested serving ) and it would be very difficult to ban such kind of information. However, its presentation should be allowed only if all legislative requirements on food labelling are met, especially requirements on comprehensibility and readability, and in view of our previous experience we would recommend to stipulate a maximum area in % for that kind of information. Clear and readable labelling The consumer surveys clearly show that a high percentage of consumers are not interested in food labelling (at all or only exceptionally) and the major part of the remainder does not understand information provided. Consumers often complain about illegible and unclear information and the size of print and the colour contrast (for example white letters on light-blue background). The size of print is identified as the main difficulty since it is often illegible for an average consumer. Nevertheless we agree with the opinion that legislation in this specific case is clear, however, the enforcement of this rule is insufficient. The restriction of the number of language versions on packages and/or certain level of standardization of print or fonts could be an appropriate solution, nevertheless, it will be necessary to consider potential measures carefully as too strict requirements could result in restraints of innovation in providing information. Preferably terms understandable for consumers should be considered (for example the use of salt instead of sodium ). We also support discussion on elements such as logos or pictograms easily and quickly interpreted by consumers, however, it will be necessary to inform consumers on such labelling and on its benefits ahead of time. We are of the opinion that it should be discussed at Community level since some operators on the single market introduce different graphic systems, which are confusing for consumers. Nutrition labelling We do not support mandatory nutrition labelling for all foodstuffs and we prefer the status quo where this mandatory labelling applies to certain foodstuffs, for example to infant formula, baby food, food supplements and foodstuffs for special medical purposes. The nutrition claim should certainly be mandatory if any nutritional or health claims are indicated on the label. In other cases, we believe that the more acceptable solution is to set up nutrition labelling at voluntary basis, especially considering the new Regulation on nutrition and health claims. Nutrition labelling is currently been applied by a number of operators and nutrition data can be found on a majority of labels. It will certainly be helpful to consider alternative forms of labelling as logos, pictograms, colour coding, etc. However, rules consistent with horizontal requirements on food labelling shall be established. In connection with nutrition labelling, we regard as necessary to deal not only with a presentation of information and the selection of data for presentation but also with determination of nutritional values and apart from the list of recommended analytical methods, determination by calculation based on recognized table values should also be considered. This option is especially important for small and medium sized operators, for whom analytical determination only could be burdening. However, it would be necessary to reach agreement on the establishment of such tables
and to decide whether to prepare tables at Community level or tables at national level would be acceptable. Origin labelling Origin labelling is a sensitive issue which would be, in our opinion, one of the most controversial ones. According to the current legislation labelling of country of origin is mandatory in certain cases (for example fresh fruits, bovine meat), but the frequent requirement is to extend this obligation to all foodstuffs. However, it is disputable to state a country of origin in multicomponent foodstuffs as each ingredient can originate from a different country but it is possible to consider a country of production. Even in this case, it would be necessary to take into account economic impact on trans-national companies, which frequently shift production between subsidiaries in different states and thus the situation gets even more complex. Nevertheless in this case we support the mandatory identification of economic activity of food business operators (manufacturer, packer, distributor, importer, exporter or vendor) proceeding their addresses. This requirement is in line with Codex Alimentarius General standard for the labelling of pre-packaged foods and represents important information for consumers. We also find it important to discuss the issue of private brands, which generate doubts among consumers whereas stipulations in existing legislation are vague and their application proves rather difficult. As an example the collocation made for can be named, which occurs quite often on products manufactured under private brands of business chains, which are not real producers but fall into categories of distributors or/and sellers, and private brand products are produced by manufacturers, who remain unknown to consumers and it is not possible to identify a place of business from such an indication. The issue of health marks on products covered by regulation 853/2004 should be included as well, since the health and identification mark put on products under private brands belongs to a real producer and the address given on a package is the one of the headquarter of a business chain. This situation is in our opinion no longer acceptable and confusing for an average consumer. Welfare labelling We find this kind of information interesting for consumers, however, we do not believe that such kind of information should explicitly be put on food packages. In our opinion it is an example of information which should be accessible from other information resources as it is not information essential for consumers choice when buying foodstuffs. GMO labelling GMO labelling is a very sensitive issue as well and it will certainly have to be discussed. Despite the fact that current requirements on GMO foodstuffs are included in specific legislation, we are of the opinion that this labelling should be included into horizontal rules on food labelling. Information on GMO foodstuffs is intended as information for consumers to facilitate their choice. It should be discussed whether such a piece of information is of a real importance and whether it should be put on labels or informing about this fact by a different way would be sufficient. Currently, the Czech Republic does not have any strong position in this area. Health warning on alcoholic beverages The Czech Republic understands any concerns about increasing consumption of alcoholic drinks and consequent negative health impact. Nowadays interest in risks and hazards related to excessive consumption of alcohol and the issue of alcoholism has become an important aspect of government policies in public health. Alcoholic drinks belong to foodstuffs and as other foodstuffs they are covered by general food law and other legislation related to foodstuffs at Community level. In this connection we would like to refer to the draft Regulation of European Parliament and Council on nutrition and
health claims made on foodstuffs, which defines health claims as information of positive character but health warning would be claims of negative character. Despite agreement on negative impact of inappropriate and excessive consumption of alcohol, we would like to point out studies which, on the other hand, describe positive effects of certain alcoholic drinks (for example wine or beer) on human organism when consumed moderately and within certain limits. It is unclear which alcoholic drinks should be labelled and the wording of such warnings. Negative impact of excessive alcohol consumption is sufficiently known and we do not think that warnings will have any positive effects on decrease in consumption of spirits by the young generation, given that we are afraid of opposite psychological reaction, especially of youth who could perceive it as an encouragement to alcohol consumption. We do not support discussion health warnings on alcoholic beverages as part of the revision of horizontal rules on food labelling. This issue could be discussed separately, especially due to a number of additional factors which should be taken into account in this specific case. When setting up requirements on food labelling, co-operation of all interested parties is needed since all parties are responsible including consumers, who are at the end of the food chain, and they should also accept their share of responsibility as it is not possible to regulate for example manipulation with foodstuffs in households and at the time of their preparation. However, in the framework of new food labelling legislation educational programmes and explanatory campaigns should be considered. Coordination in implementing new legislative measures and their effective enforcement will have to be ensured by the Member States. Note The aforesaid comments are not an official position of the Czech Republic but they are based on practical experience of experts working in the state administration. Nevertheless, comments include findings stemming from meetings with representatives of national food industry and written queries. Prepared by: Eva Přibylová Food Production Department Ministry of Agriculture of the CR 16 th June 2006