252. The Commission had before it ALINORM 79/28 containing the Report of the Fourth Session of the Coordinating Committee for Africa, which was held in Dakar in September 1979. The report was presented by the Coordinator for Africa, Dr. Thianar N'Doye (Senegal).
253. The Commission noted that the Standard had been examined and amended by the Committee in the light of comments received from Argentina, Malawi and Senegal and had been advanced to Step 5 of the Procedure for the Elaboration of Regional Standards. The Committee had also decided that the Standard should be forwarded to the newly-formed Committee on Cereals and Cereal Products to be considered for elaboration as a worldwide standard.
254. The Coordinator expressed some concern that, as the Standard had not yet gone before the new Committee, the future of the standard was uncertain.
255. The Commission agreed that consideration of the Standard should be an item on the agenda of the first meeting of the Codex Committee on Cereals and Cereal Products. Should that Committee decide not to develop a worldwide standard for maize, then it was open to the Coordinating Committee for Africa to continue to elaborate a Regional Standard.
256. The delegation of the United States of America reiterated its offer (see paragraph 112) to inquire whether its Government was willing to host the Committee outside the United States.
Matters Arising from the Report of the Fourth Session of the Coordinating Committee for Africa
257. The Coordinator informed the Commission that on the basis of recommendations made by the consultant who had examined food products of importance in the region, it had been decided to advise the Commission of its intention to undertake the elaboration of regional standards for the following products:
Dry Sorghum and Millet Grains for Direct Human Consumption;
Dried Grains of Legumes for Direct Human Consumption;
“Gari” (a West African fermented cassava meal).
258. The delegation of Australia informed the Commission that the Report of the Coordinating Committee for Africa had not been received in time to ascertain whether some of these products were of international as well as regional importance and suggested that there might be a case for sending them for consideration, as appropriate, by the Codex Committees on Cereals and Cereal Products and Vegetable Proteins.
259. The Commission noted that as far as cereals were concerned, a paper on all cereals would be prepared as background material for the Codex Committee on Cereals and Cereal Products and that the document as well as the views of that Committee would be available to the Fifth Session of the Coordinating Committee for Africa.
260. The Commission noted that a proposed Draft Standard on “Gari” had been presented to the Fourth Session of the Coordinating Committee for consideration at Step 2 and that Senegal had prepared a document on Millet, Sorghum and derived products which would form the basis of a proposed draft standard.
261. The Commission noted that there had been further progress on the adoption/adaptation of the Model Food Law by the countries of the Region of Africa. An important point which had been emphasized in the ensuing discussion was that the Model Food Law was not mandatory to Member States but was intended as a guideline to those countries which wished to up-date and harmonize their legislation.
262. The Commission noted that at the Twenty-Sixth Session of the Executive Committee a Resolution proposed by Senegal and supported by the Coordinating Committee had been discussed setting out the principles for collaboration between regional and sub-regional community organizations and the Codex Alimentarius Commission, so as to obtain more assistance from these Organizations and closer links between them and the Commission (see ALINORM 79/4, paragraphs 20–26).
263. The Executive Committee had noted that the mandate suggested by this Resolution would from the basis of a document to be prepared by a consultant recruited from the Region.
264. In accordance with Rule II.4(b) of the Rules of Procedure of the Commission and on the unanimous proposal of the Fourth Session of the Coordinating Committee for Africa, the Commission appointed Dr. Thianar N'Doye (Senegal) as Coordinator for Africa, to serve from the end of the Thirteenth Session to the end of the Fourteenth Session of the Commission.
265. The Commission expressed its appreciation to the Government of Senegal for having hosted the Fourth Session of the Coordinating Committee for Africa and for its generous hospitality. It also thanked the Government of Senegal for offering to host the Fifth Session of the Coordinating Committee in Dakar.
266. The Commission had before it the Report of the Second Session of the Coordinating Committee for Asia (ALINORM 79/15). The Session had been held in Manila, Philippines, in March 1979. In the absence of the Coordinator for Asia, Dr. A.M. Regala (Philippines), the Report was introduced by Dr. D.S. Chadha (India), who acted as Rapporteur.
268. The Rapporteur informed the Commission that many of the delegations which had attended the Session of the Coordinating Committee had expressed the view that the use of colours and flavours in vegetable oils should be restricted, because, in certain cases, as had been stated in the Coordinating Committee's Report, this could result in consumer deception.
269. He indicated that some countries in the region had expressed interest in the idea of developing standards for vegetable ghee and that India had offered to prepare a first draft of a standard for this product, which should more probably be called “hydrogenated vegetable oils”. He also referred to the particular interest of the countries of the region in the work of the Codex Committee on Foods for Special Dietary Uses.
271. The Rapporteur, in continuing his review of the Coordinating Committee's Report, mentioned in particular the importance of the recommendation, in the abovementioned document, concerning the desirability of establishing Advisory Boards in each country to assist in the implementation of food control. Emphasis had also been placed on the need for establishing training facilities, particularly in the field of hygiene. In the rural areas, the idea of mobile units had been welcomed. The Coordinating Committee for Asia had stressed that more emphasis needed to be placed on the importance of food control work in the region.
Steps being taken or which should be taken at the national level in order to be able to comply with the international standards; and
whether, from the point of view of the countries of the region, any of the provisions of the international standards were unrealistically difficult for them to meet. The Report of the consultant was attached as Appendix III to ALINORM 79/15.
273. The Rapporteur indicated that during the course of the consideration of the consultant's report by the Coordinating Committee, the delegation of Thailand drew attention to a serious problem which it had encountered following its acceptance of the Recommended Codex Standard for Canned Pineapple, and following the consequent adjustment in its national legislation and also in its canned pineapple industry. The problem was explained in full in paragraph 79 of ALINORM 79/15, but the main point was that certain importers in a number of developed countries, which had not accepted the Recommended Standard for Canned Pineapple, imported canned pineapple which was not in conformity with the Codex Standard. These importers had indicated that they did not require the product to meet certain quality requirements provided for in the Codex Standard concerning details of style and types of pack, definitions of certain defects, etc. The Rapporteur referred to difficulties which had been mentioned by the delegation of Malaysia to the Coordinating Committee's Session concerning exports of cooked, peeled, frozen prawns. That delegation had indicated that it would not be advantageous to accept Codex Standards as long as the importing countries were not accepting them.
274. The most important matter arising from the report was the question of acceptances. The Coordinating Committee had endorsed the recommendations of the consultant as set forth in paragraphs 54 to 66 of his report. The Coordinating Committee had strongly urged the importing countries to accept the Codex Standards which the exporting developing countries of the region were keen to use for trading purposes. At the same time, the Coordinating Committee thought that there might be merit in dividing the standards into two main parts (i) a mandatory part of the Standard concerning all provisions relating to food safety; and (ii) an optional part covering other matters, including quality, which could be left for settlement between importer and exporter. The Rapporteur indicated that the Coordinating Committee had thought that in this way, acceptances would be facilitated. He also thought that, in any event, the whole subject of the format of Codex Standards and the amount of detail the Standards contain, as well as the related question of acceptances, needed to be reviewed. The most important thing was to implement the Codex Standards at the national level.
275. The Rapporteur further informed the Commission about the need for assistance to the developing countries in strengthening their food control infrastructure, including strengthening of laboratories and training, which should receive the highest priority from FAO and WHO, so that they could, while accepting a Codex Standard, be in a position to implement it. Such strengthening of the national infrastructure would better equip them in participating in the Commission's work and safeguard their interests.
277. The Codex Secretariat informed the Commission that the discussions which had taken place at the Second Session of the Coordinating Committee for Asia concerning the question of the amount of detail in some Codex Standards and, in the view of the Coordinating Committee, the related problem of acceptances, had been brought to the attention of the Codex Committee on General Principles at its Sixth Session in October 1979. The problem which the delegation of Thailand had described concerning the Codex Standard for Canned Pineapple had also been brought to attention.
278. The views of the Codex Committee on General Principles concerning the above matters are set forth in paragraphs 34 to 40 of ALINORM 79/35. It had been stated in the Codex Committee on General Principles that simplified international standards might lead to more acceptances, but if detailed national provisions were not the subject of negotiations and agreement in the international standards, exporting countries would then have to comply with a variety of possibly very detailed national requirements, over and above the requirements of the international standards. The Codex Secretariat expressed the opinion that it had to be taken that detailed international standards were a reflection of the fact that products corresponding to the detailed provisions of the standards did move in international trade. If this was the case, there was a strong argument in favour of international negotiation regarding the details. This would seem to be particularly so if many countries had detailed national standards or were considering developing detailed standards. On the other hand, some countries might not have detailed national standards for some of the products covered by the Codex Standards not even any standards, detailed or otherwise, and it might be easier for them to accept less detailed international standards. It seemed to the Codex Secretariat that this was a matter which could benefit from further examination.
279. The Codex Secretariat also referred to the importance which the Codex Committee on General Principles had attached to governments giving consideration to the possibility of permitting products in conformity with the Codex Standards to be allowed into their countries, even though, for domestic reasons, they might not be able to formally accept the standards. The Codex Committee on General Principles had considered that this would be a very positive action in favour of facilitating international trade. In this connection, the Committee had requested the Secretariat to find better terminology than “non-acceptance” for classifying responses of this kind from governments.
280. Several delegations expressed themselves as being in favour of the recommendation of the Codex Committee on General Principles concerning the granting of free entry, in certain cases, to products in conformity with Codex Standards. It was also suggested that it was important that governments should respond and indicate their positions concerning the standards. Deviations notified could be examined by the Secretariat, as provided for in the Procedure for the Elaboration of Codex Standards and a thorough analysis of these deviations could lead to desirable amendments of the standards.
281. The Rapporteur gave examples of what he would consider essential factors and optional factors. All safety matters should be covered in essential factors including hygiene, food additives, contaminants and basic and essential quality, Optional factors would include styles, cuts, etc. In the view of the Rapporteur, optional factors should be a matter between buyer and seller. For this reason, he thought that the format of Codex Standards should be re-examined. Some delegations supported the views of the Rapporteur. Several delegations stated that the issues raised by the Coordinating Committee for Asia concerning format and acceptance of the Codex Standards were important matters which raised some complex issues. These delegations thought that the whole subject should be referred to the Codex Committee on General Principles for consideration.
282. The Commission agreed to refer the subject of the format of Codex Standards, i.e. the amount of detail in them and the related question of acceptances to the next Session of the Codex Committee on General Principles for consideration. The Secretariat was requested to prepare a suitable background paper to facilitate the discussions.
283. Concerning the problems of availability of suitable quality of tinplate, as referred to in paragraph 107 of ALINORM 79/15, the Commission endorsed the view of the Coordinating Committee that UNIDO should be requested to convene a working group from countries of the region of Asia with a view to developing cooperation amongst these countries for the manufacture of the right quality of tinplate from indigenous sources and other appropriate and cheaper packaging materials. On the question of standards for tinplate and lacquer, the Commission agreed with the Coordinating Committee that the International Organization for Standards (ISO) seemed the most appropriate body to deal with this matter. The Commission instructed the Secretariat to approach UNIDO and ISO on these matters.
284. The Commission agreed that the proposal of the Coordinating Committee that the Recommended Standard for Tropical Fruit Salad be amended so as to allow this product to be designated “Tropical Fruit Cocktail” as a permissible alternative to “Tropical Fruit Salad”, should be referred to the Codex Committee on Processed Fruits and Vegetables for consideration (ALINORM 79/15, paragraph 110).
285. Concerning the amendments proposed by the Coordinating Committee to certain Step 9 Standards, as listed in Appendix III, paragraph 65 of ALINORM 79/15, the Commission agreed that these proposed amendments would need to be formulated precisely, and in detail, before they could profitably be considered by the Commodity Committees concerned. The Commission agreed that these matters might be considered by the Coordinating Committee at its next Session.
286. As regards the subject of developing harmonized labelling requirements for processed meat products which would be in conformity with Islamic religious requirements, the Codex Secretariat indicated that the Saudi Arabian authorities had been in communication with it and that the question of and need for holding a meeting of Working Group of qualified technical and religious experts on this topic in Saudi Arabia would be reviewed in the light of studies on the subject presently under way.
287. Concerning the proposal of the delegation of Pakistan that international standards be elaborated for carbonated soft drinks, including cola based drinks, the delegation of Canada indicated that the Commission, at an earlier session, had concluded that international standards for these products were not necessary. The Commission noted that Pakistan was still studying this matter, which it expected would be brought up by Pakistan at the next Session of the Coordinating Committee for Asia. The Commission took no action on the matter at this time.
288. In accordance with Rule II.4(b) the Rules of Procedure of the Commission and on the unanimous proposal of the Coordinating Committee for Asia, the Commission appointed Dr. D. Chadha (India) as Coordinator for Asia, to serve from the end of the Thirteenth Session to the end of the Fourteenth Session of the Commission.
289. The Commission had before it the Report of the Coordinating Committee for Europe (ALINORM 79/19). The Coordinator for Europe, Prof. H. Woidich (Austria) gave an account of the work accomplished by the Coordinating Committee since the last Session of the Commission. He also introduced those items on which action was required by the Commission.
290. The Commission noted that the Coordinating Committee for Europe had adopted a system of size grading of canned peas (Appendix IV, ALINORM 79/19) and had recommended that it should be further considered by the Codex Committee on Processed Fruits and Vegetables with a view to its inclusion in the Recommended Standard for Canned Peas. Should this prove to be unacceptable, the Coordinating Committee had expressed the wish that the size grading. system be appended to the Standard as an optional European Recommended System of Size Grading. The Commission agreed that this matter be referred to the Codex Committee on Processed Fruits and Vegetables for consideration and the Committee should also look at the size grading system which had been developed by the Joint Codex/ECE Group on the Standardization of Quick Frozen Foods and Quick Frozen Peas.
291. The Commission noted that the Coordinating Committee had considered the terms of reference proposed by the Twelfth Session of the Commission and had proposed amendments to paragraphs (b) and (d) thereof (see paragraphs 89-90, ALINORM 79/19). The Commission agreed that it was appropriate to amend paragraph (b) of the terms of reference as proposed by the Coordinating Committee, since it was considered to be more the task of the Coordinating Committees in developing regions to stimulate and strengthen food control infrastructures. As regards the proposed amendment to paragraph (d) of the terms of reference, several delegations considered that the wording proposed by the Coordinating Committee went well beyond just standards for products of a regional interest. These delegations were of the opinion that regional standards should be established only where the foods concerned moved exclusively in intra-regional trade and not also for foods which, although of interest to a given region, moved in international trade. Other delegations were of the opinion that there existed appropriate procedures which governed the establishment of regional Codex Standards and that it was not the purpose of the proposed amendment to encourage the establishment of regional standards where the establishment of such standards was not appropriate.
292. The Commission, noting that other Coordinating Committees still wished to reconsider their terms of reference in the light of experience gained in their application, decided that the terms of reference together with the proposed amendments to paragraph (d) be referred back to the Coordinating Committee for Europe for reconsideration.
293. The Commission had before it suggestions by the Coordinating Committee for Europe for possible future work (paragraphs 91-96, ALINORM 79/19). The Coordinator for Europe indicated that the Coordinating Committee was not seeking the approval of the Commission to start work on all the items listed in its Report. However, it had expressed the opinion that it would be desirable to elaborate general standards and guidelines in particular as indicated in paragraph 95, for mayonnaise and mayonnaise-type products.
294. The delegation of India was of the opinion that work on problems such as mycotoxins, nitrosamines, PNAHs and PCBs, residues from packaging materials and guidelines concerning hygiene in catering establishments were problems of general interest and would not be appropriate for the Coordinating Committee for Europe. Furthermore, it was of the opinion that raw materials should not be standardized unless absolutely necessary. The delegation of India also pointed out that the standardization of condiments was not a matter for a regional but rather for a worldwide committee.
295. The delegation of the United States of America was of the opinion that some of the items such as flour confectionery, in paragraph 95 of the Report, were not sufficiently specific to enable the Commission to reach conclusions concerning the desirability, or otherwise, to embark on the establishment of regional Codex Standards.
296. The Codex Secretariat drew the Commission's attention to paragraph 92 which described possible future activities for the Coordinating Committee for Europe. These activities included a review of European food legislation, with particular emphasis on recent developments, an examination of the activities of international organizations concerned with food standardization in that region and consideration of food law enforcement and control systems in European countries. The observer from the EEC was in full support of the proposed items of work of the Coordinating Committee for Europe, including standards for mayonnaise and mayonnaise-type products. The Commission agreed that such activities would be appropriate for the Coordinating Committee for Europe. It also noted the on-going work of the Coordinating Committee concerning the elaboration of standards for vinegar and the Committee's intention to cover the complementary work on mayonnaise and mayonnaise-type products.
297. The Coordinator for Europe indicated that there still existed interest by some countries in the Region of Europe in the elaboration of a standard for boneless meat and suggested that the possibility of undertaking such work might be explored in consultation with the interested producing countries.
298. The delegation of Australia, supported by a number of countries, were strongly of the opinion that any standard established for boneless meat should be worldwide, but were also of the opinion that as most of the boneless meat traded internationally was destined for further processing, it was not appropriate to undertake work on this commodity. They recalled that the Codex Committee on Meat had closely considered and rejected a previous proposal to standardize boneless meat. In the opinion of these delegations, no new circumstances had emerged which suggested that this decision should be reviewed.
299. The Commission decided that no work on boneless meat should be undertaken, either by the Coordinating Committee for Europe or the Codex Committee on Meat, which had adjourned sine die.
300. The Commission noted that the Codex Committee on Food Labelling had endorsed the labelling section of the European Regional Standard for Natural Mineral Water. It also noted that the Codex Committee on Food Hygiene had not endorsed sub-section 5.2 of the section on Hygiene which dealt with microbiological criteria of the water (paragraphs 135-139, ALINORM 79/13). It noted in this respect, the intention of the Codex Committee on Food Hygiene to develop a Code of Hygienic Practice for the Collecting, Processing and Marketing of Natural Mineral Waters (paragraphs 118-119, ALINORM 79/13A).
301. As regards the section on Methods of Analysis and Sampling, the Commission noted that the Codex Committee on Methods of Analysis and Sampling had endorsed two methods which were essential to define certain parameters in the Standard for Natural Mineral Water. The Commission endorsed the view of the Codex Committee on General Principles that Codex methods of analysis should only be developed for provisions included in the Standard (paragraph 68, ALINORM 79/35).
302. The Commission was informed that the Coordinating Committee for Europe had considered, in the light of comments from governments in response to a circular distributed by the Secretariat (CL 1979/6), the desirability, or otherwise, of amending the European Regional Standard for Honey. The Coordinating Committee had agreed to postpone further consideration of the Standard for Honey pending the availability of certain necessary data.
303. A number of delegations expressed the opinion that if revised, the standard for honey should be developed on a worldwide basis in view of the fact that honey represented an important commodity in international trade. The delegation of New Zealand expressed concern at some of the conclusions reached by the Coordinating Committee and pointed out that while the standard was a European regional standard, it was drawn up to cover honeys of good quality arriving in Europe from other countries and should not be seen as a European domestic standard. The delegation of New Zealand, therefore, proposed that if revised, the standard for honey should be developed on a worldwide basis in view of the fact that honey represented an important commodity in international trade. This view was supported by several delegations.
304. The Codex Secretariat indicated that most of the acceptances received on the standard for honey were from non-European countries, a number of which could only accept the regional standard with specified deviations. In the opinion of the Secretariat, the most appropriate procedure to follow appeared to be that laid down in the Procedure for the Elaboration of Regional Codex Standards (footnote 1, Step 10) according to which, the Secretariat was required to examine deviations notified by governments and to report to the Commission concerning possible amendments.
305. The Commission agreed to follow the procedure suggested by the Secretariat and requested the Secretariat to examine the specified deviations communicated by governments and the reactions of governments on the basis of a further circular, if necessary, and to report to the Executive Committee on this matter.
307. The Commission noted, with approval, the Resolution of the Food Standards Regional Conference.
308. The delegation of France informed the Commission that France was interested in the work of the Region of Latin America and hoped to participate therein.
309. In accordance with Rule II.4(b) of the Rules of Procedure of the Commission, the Commission on the unanimous proposal of the delegations of the Region of Latin America present at the Commission's Session, appointed Mr. A.M. Dovat (Uruguay) as Coordinator for Latin America, to serve from the end of the Thirteenth Session to the end of the Fourteenth Session of the Commission.
310. Mr. Dovat, in accepting the position of Coordinator for Latin America, informed the Commission that his authorities would be willing to host in Uruguay the Second Session of the Coordinating Committee for Latin America. The Commission expressed its appreciation of the valuable work done by the outgoing Coordinator, Dr. E. Mendez (Mexico).
