7/11/2003
Nutrition and health claims
Proposal for a Regulation of the EP and of the Council on Nutrition and Health Claims made on Foods

CIAA, the Confederation of the European Food and Drink Industries, supports a harmonised regulatory framework, which is efficient, transparent, proportionate and predictable and welcomes the role of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) in the evaluation of the scientific substantiation.

Any food should be able to carry a nutrition and/or a health claim provided the claim is:
• Substantiated;
• Made in the context of the total diet;
• Appropriately communicated so as to provide meaningful information to the consumer.

With respect to the proposal COM (2002) 424 Final adopted by the Commission on 16th July 2003, CIAA has major concerns about:
• Restrictions on the use of nutrition and health claims on the basis of specific nutrient profiles or alcohol content;
• A priori prohibition of so-called implied health claims without any consideration as to whether the general conditions (substantiation, reference to the total diet and appropriate communication) are fulfilled;
• Control of the actual wording of the claim.

The European Food and Drink Industry needs predictable legislation that provides room to food operators to innovate and remain competitive in a global market whilst guaranteeing consumers the information to make appropriate dietary choices.

CIAA Position

For many years the Food and Drink Industry has pointed out that there is a need for a EU regulatory framework authorising disease risk related claims. The current rules are interpreted in different ways by the National Authorities and thus create not only obstacles to trade and distortion of competition, but lead also to distortions in consumer information and discourage investment in research and development.

CIAA has notably proposed concrete solutions in its Code of Practice on Claims . Various self-regulatory initiatives of setting up codes of practices have taken place. Such codes are currently in place and implemented in a number of Member States (e.g. Sweden, UK and The Netherlands).

CIAA strongly endorses the principle that any food, including alcoholic beverages, should be able to carry a nutrition and/or health claim provided that the claim is substantiated.
Harmonised rules should be based on the principle that a claim is lawful provided it meets the following criteria:
• The manufacturer must be able to substantiate the claim.
• The substantiation should be in proportion with the claimed benefit: the stronger the claim, the stronger the substantiation must be.
• The claimed health benefit should be appropriately communicated so as to provide meaningful consumer information and, in particular, be placed in the context of the total diet.

CIAA supports a harmonised framework, which is efficient, transparent, proportionate and predictable. It will help Food & Drink companies to market and promote innovative products and provide an incentive for their continued investment in research and development.

However, CIAA has major concerns about some aspects of the proposal, which undermine the scientific validity and integrity of the intended measures:
• Some of the provisions are disproportionate and unacceptably restrictive. The principle of proportionality requires that legislation should not be more restrictive than necessary to achieve the intended objectives. Requirements going beyond necessary restrictions are, in particular, the setting of nutrient profiles, the a priori ban on certain claims and the authorisation of precise wording.
• Once the process of examining the scientific substantiation (by EFSA) is established and appropriate principles of communication are agreed, the proposed Regulation sets already strict, tight and complete provisions of control. There is no further need for provisions on a priori prohibition of certain types of claims or for provisions that may lead to the exclusion of certain categories of foods from the possibility to communicate their specific health benefits to consumers.
• The late introduction of Article 4 imposing more restrictions on the use of claims based on the so-called nutrient profiles which foodstuffs must respect in order to bear claims raises strong concerns within the F&D industry.

CIAA fully supports the statement contained in the explanatory memorandum of the proposal: ”the concept of prohibiting the use of claims on certain foods on the basis of their “nutritional profile” is contrary to the basic principle in nutrition that there are no “good” and “bad” foods but rather “good” and “bad” diets.” CIAA recalls an earlier statement by DG SANCO that “defining a “desirable” nutritional profile could be difficult with many products being borderline cases”.

CIAA cannot agree with the concept of undesirable nutrient profiles and the consequent prohibition of any claim on those foodstuffs:
-It represents an inappropriate attempt to set nutrition policy via regulation.
-It does not take into consideration the fact that companies already have responsibility, via the EU Regulation on General Food Law , for the impact of their products on the health of consumers.

The selection of a balanced diet should be a matter of choice based on the judicious and preferential selection of foods by consumers.
• Innovation will be stifled by the restrictive nature of the rules on nutrition and health claims set out in this proposal. This will discourage R & D investment, deny consumers within the Community potentially beneficial products and information, and could halt the steady improvement, over recent years, of nutrient intake.
• The key to success in meeting the objectives of the proposed Regulation will be the achievement of a text that comprises workable procedures with clear timetables that avoid unnecessary delays in the approval process. For instance, all wording for a claim would need to be reviewed by EFSA, as well as any change to that wording after the approval has been finalised. If this situation is not improved, the functioning of EFSA will be slowed down, inhibiting the needed focus on essential food safety issues.
• The proposal, as currently drafted, would represent new barriers to trade in the movement of foodstuffs in relation to third-party countries. The proposal should be, in so far as possible, aligned with the work of Codex Alimentarius on nutrition and health claims.

The proposal no longer places priority on improvements in the functioning of the internal market and severely limits consumer access to information on nutrition and health.

If legislation is to meet the principles of proportionality, practicability and result in equal and fair enforcement, the detail and procedures of the proposal need to be re-examined with regard to its fundamental purpose.