The
European Economic and Trade Office (EETO), together with the European Business
Regulatory Cooperation (EBRC), the Taiwan Food and Drug Administration (TFDA),
and the Bureau of Foreign Trade (BOFT) hosted food industry experts at its 2014
"EU-TW Food Safety Seminar" from 4-5 June in Taipei. The European
Chamber of Commerce Taiwan (ECCT), the Taiwan Food Good Manufacturing Practice
Development Association (GMP), and the Taiwan Food Industry Development
Association (TFIDA) provided support to the event.
The
seminar, attended on both days by around 200 participants, including
representatives of European and Taiwanese regulatory authorities, academia,
industry and consumer associations, is part of the EU efforts to enhance
EU-Taiwan cooperation aimed at facilitating the harmonization of Taiwan's
regulatory environment with international standards and share best practices with
the aim of ensuring food safety and protection of consumers. The
seminar, which concluded with a lively panel discussion, helped to clarify the
effectiveness of food safety in the EU, improve understanding among various
stakeholders in government and industry and provide a platform for further cooperation.
_______________________________
Day 1 – Wednesday,
4 June 2014
Shiu
Ming-neng, Vice Minister of Ministry of Health and Welfare (MoHW), Viktoria
Lövenberg, Deputy Head of the EETO, and Chiang Been-huang, Minister of State
without Portfolio, Executive Yuan, delivered opening remarks at the seminar by
welcoming greater information exchanges and future cooperation between Europe
and Taiwan.
1. "Taiwan's Food Sanitation Act and food
safety regulations" - Wu Tsung-hsi. Section Chief, Section of Food Imports
Management, Food Safety Division, TFDA Overview of
Taiwan’s Food Sanitation Act and related food safety regulations. Current rules
on food labelling require that each food additive ingredient be labelled and
the percentage of main ingredients of designated products be indicated. The Act
includes provisions for penalties to be imposed on those who violate food
importation rules. Systematic inspections are foreseen n for various products,
including meat.
2. "The EU’s food safety system" - Patrick
Deboyser, Minister Counsellor, Delegation of the European Union to Thailand, DG
SANCO
In
the aftermath of the food scares that plagued the EU in the 90's (BSE, dioxin,
etc.), the European Commission published a "White Paper" in 2000,
advocating a "radical new approach to food safety, from farm to
fork". There was instant and wide-spread support for the reform ideas
outlined in the "White Paper" and Regulation (EC) No 178/2002, which
contains the main elements on the new policy proposed, was adopted by Council
and Parliament in record time. This Regulation:
- lays down the general principles and
requirements of food law (including traceability and the first ever
codification of the precautionary principle);
- establishes EFSA – the European Food
Safety; and
- provides new procedures in matters of
food safety including the Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed (RASFF), and a
number of procedures to deal with emergency situation and crisis management.
3. "EU regulatory harmonization (WTO /
international)" - Dr Hans Joostens, Policy Officer, DG Trade
The
presentation provided an overview of key international principles of food
safety, focusing on the framework of the WTO SPS Agreement and Codex
Alimentarius, stressing the importance of respect of international rules and
standards for being accepted as a predictable and reliable trading partner.
4. Q&A
Questions
focused on the process of developing regulations and how do regulators work with
and communicate with industry. The panelists explained that one of the general
principles set out in Regulation EC No 178/2002 was the principle of transparency,
which includes public consultation. EU and Member States are obliged to consult
with stakeholders and there are mechanisms to safeguard this. Failure to
consult can be a basis for the annulment of a legal act by the court. On
consultation in the international context, European experience has shown that
it was more efficient to maintain frequent and close communication between
trading partners to clarify and address potential problems before they surface.
On the subject of self-regulation of Food Business Operators (FBOs), the TFDA
clarified that it aimed to encourage FBOs to do more in terms of
self-regulation.
5. "Food controls in the EU - General
framework" - Dr Hans Joostens
The
presentation covered the key principles for EU food legislation and food
control. In principle, everyone is involved in law making in the EU, with citizens,
interest groups and experts consulted before the European Commission makes a
formal proposal. Once adopted by the European Parliament and the Council of
Ministers, implementation of regulations is the task of national or local
authorities. Member States are obliged to carry out their own food controls
regularly, on a risk basis and with appropriate
frequency, without prior warning at any of stage of production, processing and
distribution. In addition to the controls carried out by the EU member states,
the European Commission, in its role as guardian of the European Union
Treaties, is responsible for ensuring that EU legislation on food safety,
animal health, plant health and animal welfare is properly implemented and
enforced. The EU has this unique system of controls and additional layers
guarantee a high level of safety for member states and for trading partners. While
rules are strict, they are fair, transparent and consistent and the rewards for
food exporters to the EU are substantial. Once granted access, FBOs can do
business in all 28 member states. Trading partners can make use of the EU's
unique set-up of control for their own imports and resource-efficiency.
6. "Food controls in the EU – Controls by
MS" - Dr Edzart Bruinier, Senior Scientific Officer of Veterinary Products,
The Netherlands Food and Consumer Product Safety Authority
The
presentation provided an overview of The Netherlands Food and Consumer Product
Safety Authority (NVWA) and its activities. The NVWA follows the Regulation EC
No 178/2002 and the HACCP principles. It encourages development of
guides of good practices for small businesses and approves sectorial national
guides developed by industry. Supervision is ensured through audit, inspection
and communication and is risk-based.
7. Q&A
On
questions related to import requirements for food outside the EU, the panelist
clarified that this requires inspection by the Food and Veterinary Office
(FVO). The authorities of the exporting country have to verify that the
importer is qualified. The European Commission will approve the importer if it
has an appropriate food safety system in place. Companies that export food to
the EU have to abide by EU rules. In case of serious incidents, EU authorities'
first response is to ask the authorities of the respective trading partner to
take the appropriate action. Only in severe cases will a trading partner be
blacklisted. In Taiwan, the EU deals with the Bureau of Standards, Metrology
and Inspections (BSMI) which keeps a list of authorized companies.
8. "EU food safety risk management and
communication" - Patrick Deboyser
In
the EU, risk analysis is the basis
of the food law except where this would be inappropriate. Risk assessment is
based on the available scientific evidence undertaken in an independent,
objective and transparent manner. Risk management takes into account
international standards, the results of risk assessment, other factors
legitimate to the issue under consideration and the precautionary principle. Since 2002, the EFSA has been
responsible for assessing risk while the European Commission, Parliament,
Council of Ministers and the Standing Committee have been responsible for risk
management. The EU Rapid Alert
System for Food and Feed (RASFF), created in 1979, has proved its usefulness in
disseminating key information and mitigating the impact of food safety. In
2002, the RASF was enshrined in legislation. It is an extremely valuable tool
not only for EU MS, but also third countries. There is a legal obligation to notify third countries concerned if
a problematic product has been distributed to the third country. To protect FBOs, the name of the company
is not disclosed until the information on the source of the product is
validated. A food product may not be sold in the EU unless it is accompanied
with an indication of the lot to which the food belongs. This type of batch
number system is useful because it can easily allow for the removal of
contaminated products. The EU rules on traceability cover all food and feed
marketed in the EU, with specific requirements laid down in vertical
legislation regarding live animals, meat, fish, eggs, fruit and vegetables.
9. Q&A
On
the role of EFSA in food safety, the panelists clarified that EFSA is not involved in monitoring or
enforcement, except as a consultant in specific cases; Commission can ask EFSA
for emergency consultation services. On RASFF, the panelists stressed that any
third country can ask for online access ("RASFF Window") to the
system (eg. TFDA can see alerts related to Taiwan, including restricted
information related to specific cases). On method to be used by FBOs to trace
food, it was clarified that except in special cases like beef and eggs, the
mechanism of traceability is not specified for operators. They can devise their
own methods, as long as they are effective. The methods are then inspected
through audits. FBOs have to provide a traceability system when applying for
approval.
Day 2 – Thursday,
5 June 2014
1. "Food controls in the EU – Combatting
fraud at the EU level" - Stéphane André, Policy Officer, DG SANCO
There
was currently no unified EU-wide definition of food fraud, but generally a
"food fraud" is committed when food is deliberately placed on the
market, for financial gain, with the intention of deceiving the consumer. Responsibility
for preventing food fraud lies mainly with FBOs. Member States are responsible
for covering all stages of production and enforcing the law. Food safety policy
is harmonized across the EU. Following
the horse meat scandal, the European Commission decided to set up a Food Fraud
Network with food fraud contact points within member states and a food fraud
team in DG SANCO. It is also developing a dedicated IT tool for the rapid and
efficient exchange of information and alerts on food fraud cases.
2. "EU rules on labelling and
traceability" - Patrick Deboyser
The
EU has recently adopted new rules on "Food Information to Consumers"
(Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011), which will come into force in December 2014. It
changes the existing legislation on food labelling notably in respect of:
- Mandatory origin labelling of unprocessed
meat from pigs, sheep, goats and poultry;
- Highlighting allergens e.g. peanuts or milk
in the list of ingredients;
- Better legibility i.e. minimum size of
text;
- Mandatory nutrition information on
processed foods (from December 2017).
Requirements
on information on allergens also cover non pre-packed foods including those
sold in restaurants and cafés. In addition,
Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 regulates the nutrition claims and health claims
which can be made in respect of food. 'Nutrition claims' (e.g. "rich in
calcium") may only be made if they conform with the criteria laid down in
the Annex to the Regulation. 'Health claims' can be classified as 'Function claims'
(e.g. "calcium fortifies the bones") and 'Disease Risk Reduction
Claims' (e.g. "calcium may reduce one of the risk factors for
osteoporosis") can only be used if they have been specifically authorised
by the Commission, following a scientific assessment conducted by EFSA.
3. "Industry self-regulation" - Ms Bonnie Sun Pan, Chairperson, GMP
& Chair Professor, National Taiwan Ocean University
The
presentation provided a brief history of food safety regulatory measures in Taiwan. The act governing food
sanitation in Taiwan was introduced in 1975. Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP)
was introduced in 1989, changing the mindset of food operators. In 1989 the CAS
certification for agricultural products was introduced. There are 5,200
registered food businesses in Taiwan, of
which only 445
are members of GMP certified accounting
for 66% of the total value of Taiwan's food
businesses. Over the past 25 years the Industrial Development Bureau (IDB) has
invested €24.5 million in promoting
food industry
self-regulation, whilst the GMP members invested €734.8 million to upgrade themselves in order to comply with Taiwan GMP requirements, being of higher
standards than the international GMP. The GMP member companies in Taiwan are
also compliant with Codex and HACCP.
4. Q&A
On
a question why are trans-fats not allowed to be listed in the new EU labelling
regulations, the panelists clarified that
FBOs in the EU are proactively taking action to reduce trans-fats in their
products already. FBOs are likely to phase out palm oil owing to consumer
opposition to trans-fats as well as for environmental reasons given the poor
environmental record of palm oil producers. Currently palm oil is in the list
of categories that have to be labeled. However, in the process of phasing out
trans-fats, producers often compensate for this by increasing the level of saturated
fats. Commission's view is that the total fat content is the most important
issue that consumers need to be aware of.
On
a question whether ingredients of composite ingredients need to be labelled,
the panelists noted that this was also covered under the EU's new labeling
rules.
5. "EU regulation on GMOs – GMO authorisation" - Patrick Deboyser
The
presentation provided a brief overview of the EU's legislative framework. Applications
for GMO authorisations must be established
in the EU and no fee is due. A scientific opinion (ESFA) will be provided
within six months of the application and the Commission will make a decision
within three months of the opinion. If granted, based on a positive opinion of
the standing committee, the authorization will be valid for 10 years and may be
renewed upon request. To date the EU has granted a number of authorisations for
GM food/feed (8 for cotton, 29 for maize, 2 for genetically modified
microorganisms, 3 for oilseed rape, 7 for soybeans and 1 for sugar beet) but
only one GMO for maize has been authorized for cultivation. It is grown in Spain,
which is the only country in the EU cultivating this type of maize in a
significant way. On the other hand, animal feed in the EU is predominantly GM.
About 80% of the maize and soy used in the EU for animal feed is genetically
modified (and labelled as such). The EU could not feed its cattle if it were
not for GMOs.
6. "GMO labelling" - Stéphane André
Provisions
for the labelling of GM food and feed are set out in Regulations (EC) 1829/2003
and 1830/2003. These provisions apply to food and feed containing or consisting
of GMOs, food and feed produced from or containing ingredients produced from
GMOs (such as oil, starch, derivatives or lecithin), where DNA or proteins from
the GMO cannot be detected anymore. All food or feed products
containing/produced from authorised GMOs must be labelled. The label aims to
allow consumer to make an informed purchasing choice. Exemptions are allowed
for food and feed products containing, consisting of or produced from GMOs in a
proportion no higher than 0.9% of the food/feed ingredient considered
individually or food/feed consisting of a single ingredient, provided that this
presence is adventitious or technically unavoidable, operators are in a
position to supply evidence to competent authorities that they have taken
appropriate steps to avoid the presence of such material. There is a precise
protocol for labeling. And the wordings for the following cases were indicated:
when the food consists of more than one ingredient, when there is no list of
ingredient, for non-pre-packaged food, and when the feed contains or consists
of or is produced from GMOs.
7. "Food and beverage management – Hazard
Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) in the EU" - Dr Thomas Pavie,
Deputy Agriculture counselor for North Asia Region, French Embassy, China
Presentation
focused on concrete experience from the point of view of a food safety
inspector. HACCP is a science-based and systematic approach aimed at
identification, evaluation and control to ensure the safety of food. It was
first introduced in 1993. Since 2004, FBOs have been required to put in place,
implement and maintain a permanent procedure or procedures based on the HACCP
principles. HACCP is complex, especially for processed food. For this reason experts
are needed to assist inspectors. France's national HACCP guidelines are
frequently updated to take into account industry changes.
8. Q&A
The
panelists provide more details regarding the training of food safety inspectors
in the EU. For instance in France, candidates first have to pass an exam and undergo
one year of training, including one week of work in the dairy industry and one
week in the meat industry, and followed by a one month of training in HACCP. After
this, they have a further exam which includes a case study. Inspectors also
undergo frequent additional training helped by a network of inspectors more
specialized in HACCP, which give tutorials to inspectors. On a question whether
EU's GMO rules are discriminatory towards its trading partners, the panelists
pointed out that the EU imports huge amounts of food from third countries and
had approved 50 GMOs. However, consumers in the EU do not want GMO food and
FBOs and retailers are giving consumers what they want. 75% of world's soy
today is GM so the chance of GM soy getting into the human food processing
business is high.
9. Concluding panel discussion, moderated by GMP
Chairperson, Bonnie Sun Pan
Why was EC No
178/2002 passed so quickly?
The background was a number of food safety
crises, especially one related to dioxin. When Romano Prodi took over as Commission
President in 1999, he made food safety one of his top priorities. Besides
creation of DG SANCO, the main element was providing a scientific basis for
food safety. Post-2002 there have been relatively few food scares and the new
system has proven to guarantee a high level of food safety EU-wide and prevented
crises becoming severe because of systems put in place to address problems following
the scandals.
Does the EU pay
attention to the source in the labelling of bulk products?
This
issue is left to Member States, except for allergenic substances. Regulations
are different for different products but labelling for pre-packaged products
has to be standard.
How does the EU's
traceability system work
The
food law provides a "one step back and one step forward"
traceability. It is important to have an internal traceability system if you
need to recall a product. In NL, a horse meat company did not keep records so
they had a huge recall and loss as a result during the horse meat scandal. Even
the best traceability or labelling rules would not be
able to eliminate fraud. The objective of the food law is to
achieve food safety. NL also has a criminal investigation division for this
purpose. Record keeping has become second nature for FBOs.
Taiwan has seen
some food scandals involving additives, which is why all additive producers
have to be registered. What kind of mechanism does the EU use to apply risk
management?
The
EU has two different mechanisms. Registration is compulsory for any FBO. Every
country has different ways of registering, but all need to ensure that the competent
authority has access. Once registered, FBOs of certain high-risk products
(such as: food of animal origin, animal feed, animal by-products, bean sprouts)
need
to gain approval of their operations before they can do business. All of these
companies are listed on the EU website, by category and registration number. Risk
assessment is done by type of product and company history. This helps to
allocate resources depending on risk. Authorities send inspectors to companies
that pose the biggest risk. The EU does not have an organization in charge of
GMP across industry but by sector, such as farms and retailers and most FBOs
adopt even higher hygiene standards than GMP.
How does the EU
support small businesses?
There
is a culture in Europe of consulting with industry. Taiwan would do well to
develop a similar culture proactively. The EU is willing to help with
legislation, by arranging visits to the EU and to arrange briefings on issues
of concern. It must be a constructive dialogue. There is also a need for
support for small industry in Taiwan. In the EU small businesses get a lot of
support from associations and federations. They organize themselves with people
that can speak for them. In this way all stakeholders can learn from one
another. At EU level, further assistance is provided by giving industry a longer
time to adjust to the implementation of new rules. It can also give waivers to
SMEs to cut down paper work as long as this has not impact on food safety. Smart
and safe should be a motto to follow and building bridges with industry
associations is important.
Do products have
to be registered in the EU?
Registration
is for companies and approval is for its processes, not for actual products and
ingredients. According to the TFDA, registration in Taiwan is the same. Companies
do not need to provide product information but just indicate what they will
produce and sell. For high risk products, producers will have to be registered.
Taiwanese government is looking into creating a “food cloud”, which takes
account the whole food chain. The idea is to include registration data,
traceability and food safety in the cloud. Manufacturers will be asked to key
in detailed information.
Approach of
Taiwanese government is punitive rather than cooperative. Is the government
willing to change?
There
are only a few dishonest FBOs. Following recent food scandals involving
additives, restrictions have become too severe in Taiwan. Panelists agreed that
the regulator must find a way to strike the right balance, especially after a
crisis. Stricter laws will not necessarily lead to better results. For a food
business in the international market, if a certificate is required, it is the
shared responsibility of the government and FBOs to make sure speed is ensured.
Transparency of import conditions for business operators is also important to
help FBOs. Therefore, close cooperation between all stakeholders is important.