Health claims get stay of execution
carry a health claim has stalled a Europe-wide regulation for
health and nutrition claims and also brought down a proposed law on
fortification.
The health claims regulation, proposed by the European Commission last year, has been dropped from the parliament's agenda after MEPs failed to reach consensus on how much, or if any, influence should be given to nutrient profiles, and how claims should be worded.
Known as article 4, the Commission had proposed that all nutrition and health claims be subject to the nutritional profile of the food, suggesting that if the total amount of fat, saturates, sugar or salt it contains is above recommended levels, the claim would not be permitted.
But while most of the members of parliament's environment committee, meeting to debate the report prior to its first reading in parliament, agreed on the need for such limits, few had been able to visualize how such a system could work.
Along with article 11, preventing claims for weight loss, children's foods and psychological benefits, the legislation had seen considerable resistance from industry too, and the lack of consensus on its scope and terms led to more than 600 amendments to the original draft, a number 'rarely' seen, according to parliamentary officials.
In its third meeting on the regulation yesterday afternoon, the environment committee voted 17 to seven to not take the issue to a parliamentary vote, a procedure permitted under parliamentary regulations when compromise is unattainable.
Industry welcomed the decision as an opportunity to stall for time, in the hope that regulators will improve on the draft the second time round.
"This lack of progress is a tremendous step forward," Maurice Hanssen, president of the European federation of associations of Health Products Manufacturers (EHPM) told NutraIngredients.com.
"The current proposal is in the interest of neither consumer nor industry. It prevents many claims that are actually true and denies people the proper information needed to make their own decisions."
European authorities wanted to create a standard register of acceptable claims and definitions, identical in several languages, but this would force manufacturers to omit explanatory material, leaving consumers in the dark, argues the industry. Putting the onus on the industry to prove all claims could also cripple small producers.
Hanssen added that the legislation had been cobbled together in an attempt to rush it through under the current parliament. With parliamentary elections scheduled for June, health claims will not be debated again until the new parliament is in place, from September this year. This extra time should be used wisely to properly evaluate the consequences of the regulation, said Hanssen, which threatens to lead to a 'fossilised' industry that stifles innovation.
The Commission, required to draw up a new draft regulation for the next parliament, is expected to include more detail on how the nutrition profiling will be carried out. But with no global precedent for laws based on nutrition profiling and the new, European scientific body underresourced and overstretched, a European law for health claims is unlikely to be much easier the second time round.
The Commission had initially proposed that the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) along with other stakeholders, meet to establish profiling in the 18 months following the regulation's adoption. But at yesterday's meeting, EFSA director Geoffrey Podger suggested that this process could take up to two years, and along with a suggested six-month timeframe to evaluate each health claim, the process looks in danger of becoming as lengthy and cumbersome as novel foods approvals.
However Danish member of the PSE Torben Lund, who voted against sending the report back to the rapporteur, noted that by failing to make progress now, enlargement could add a further hurdle to the regulation.
"It will take at least eight months before we see a first reading and with enlargement coming up it could take even longer since the [new] countries need time to adjust to the work in the EU," he said.
"Consumers need adequate information and labelling to make a real consumption choice. Currently many brands and slogans confuse and misinform consumers. I believe that only healthy food must be allowed to be labelled giving a heathy signal. Therefore nutrient profiles must be a part of the regulation," he added.
The stalled health claims regulation also brought down with it the regulation on addition of vitamins and minerals to foodstuffs, proposed in November last year, which also prohibits fortification of certain foods based on their nutritional profiles. Torben Lund was the rapporteur for this regulation.
