Un nouveau règlement européen sur les allégations nutritionnelles et de santé, telles que "à faible teneur en matières grasses", "aide votre corps à lutter contre le stress" ou "purifie votre organisme", est entré en vigueur le 1er juillet 2007.
Milestones
- More than 600 amendments were tabled to the initial Nobilia report. As a result, the Environment Committee decided in April 2004 to postpone the vote. After the parliamentary elections in June 2004, a new rapporteur, Adriana Poli Bortone (UEN) was appointed.
- European Parliament Plenary delivered its opinion on 26 May 2005 and voted to delete Article 4 on nutrient profiles.
- The Council reached a common position on the issue on 3 June 2005 and rejected Parliament's Article 4 amendments - thus backing Commission's initial proposal.
- The draft regulation has been forwarded to the Parliament for its second reading, where re-amendment could only be achieved by an absolute majority.
- The ENVI Committee is set to adopt its recommendation for the second reading on 21 March 2006.
- The EP second reading is set to take place on 16 May 2006.
- The regulation is likely to be finally adopted in 2006.
Policy Summary
Citizens have become more and more interested in their diet in recent years. However, when going to the supermarket, they are often faced with claims on food packages, such as "low fat" or "helps your body resist stress". Often this information is not supported with factual data on the package label. For example, a product may be low in fat but contain high quantities of sugar or salt. This may be misleading for consumers.
In July 2003, the Commission adopted a new legislative proposal aimed at tackling unsubstantiated claims made on food. This proposal builds on the international guidelines of Codex Alimentarius, which sets out that food cannot be described or presented in a misleading manner and that the person marketing the food should be able to justify the claim made. The Codex Guidelines prohibit a list of claims, such as unsubstantiated claims, as well as claims regarding the suitability of foods for use in the prevention, treatment or cure of a disease (with exceptions).
The proposal covers two categories of claims: nutrition claims (such as "rich in vitamin C" and "low in fat") and health claims (such as "good for your beauty and your inner harmony").
The proposal does not deal with cosmetics, medicine and pet food products. It only covers food products for human consumption.
The new regulation will allow a category of previously prohibited claims relating to the reduction of disease risk.
Reference to and endorsement by doctors or health professionals will not be allowed. Health claims on alcoholic beverages with an alcohol content of 1.2 per cent and above will not be permitted.
An important role will be given to the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) which will carry out the scientific evaluation of health claims on the basis of proposals by food manufacturers.
Enjeux
Two articles in the proposal text are proving to be particularly controversial:
1. Article 4, which lays down the conditions for restricting the use of nutrition and health claims. It calls on the Commission to establish nutrient profiles (with reference to fat, sugar and salt/sodium content) for each food category within 18 months from the adoption of the regulation.
2. Article 11, which stipulates that "implied health claims" should not be allowed. This includes claims referring to general benefits for overall well-being; claims with reference to slimming or weight control or claims making reference to the advice of health professionals.
Another disputed provision in the proposal is that beverages containing more than 1.2 per cent volume of alcohol should not bear health and nutritional claims.
Réactions
A public hearing was held in the European Parliament (EP) on 8 January 2004 to discuss the proposed new regulation.
Commissioner for Public Health and Consumer Protection David Byrne:
- the new regulation will "not mark a radical departure for the food industry" but its objective is rather to harmonise the diverse rules that currently exist across the Member States.
Commission Director Paola Testori Coggi responsible for Food Safety:
- the Commission has no intention to define 'good food' and 'bad food' and that the proposal strictly covers claims on food products while the brand name itself does not fall within the scope of the proposal.
- the regulation opens up the possibility for a new group of claims on foods, those referring to diseases (subject to EFSA authorisation).</>
EP Rapporteur Mauro Nobilia:
- information related to health should have a scientific basis
- the provisions of Article 4 are not formulated clearly enough
- the Commission has only addressed 'bad diets' but not 'bad ingredients'
- clarification is needed on the relationship between the Commission and EFSA and whether the Member States would be sufficiently involved
- the restrictions under Article 11 may not be necessary if 'sufficient scientific evidence' were to become the bottom line.
Other positions
The Confederation of the Food & Drink Industry in the EU (CIAA):
- Article 4 (ie restrictions on the basis of nutrient profiles or alcohol content) could prove to be counterproductive as, the CIAA deems, it is not the composition but the use of a product that has a health effect
- against the a priori prohibition of certain types of claims or categories of foods
- opposed to the control of the actual wording of claims which would limit manufacturers' ability to alter a message over time and according to social or cultural contexts.
UEAPME, the European Association of Craft, Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises:
- the information and advertising bans planned are disproportionate
- the approval procedure with the EFSA is comparable to the approval procedure for pharmaceutical products whose associated financial and administrative expenses SMEs will not be able to bear.
The European Consumers' Organisation (BEUC):
- Ms Beate Kettlitz told EurActiv that BEUC was strongly against "emptying the draft legislation", ie taking out crucial elements, such as the nutrient profile, as proposed by industry.
- For the EP hearing, BEUC published a brochure, entitled " Tell me what I am eating: food claims", listing dubious health and nutrition claims.
Four NGOs (Euro Coop, the European Public Health Alliance, the European Heart Network and Euro Care):
- prioritise public health and consumer protection in future legislation on claims
- ban claims directed principally at children.
The Joint Health Claims Initiative of the UK's Food Standards Agency issued a report on health claims in December 2003. The report contains an initial list of well-established health statements on which claims could be based once the new regulation enters into force. The report will contribute to the UK's proposed list of claims to be submitted to the Commission.