62. The Committee noted matters arising from Codex and other international organizations related to biotechnology, including issues discussed at the 1st Session of the Codex Ad Hoc Intergovernmental Task Force on Biotechnology, the Convention of Biological Diversity: Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).
63. The Committee strongly supported the efforts of the Codex Task Force, and noted that its Working Groups had produced excellent quality work in a highly efficient and effective manner. The Committee noted the work of the OECD on biotechnology, and reaffirmed the primary role of Codex in relation to developing standards for the labelling and safety aspects of foods produced through biotechnology.
64. The delegation of Canada also informed the Committee of efforts by the Codex Committee on Food Labelling to address the labelling of foods produced through biotechnology. It was noted that the labelling options encompassed two main points of view, i.e., mandatory labelling for all products produced through biotechnology or containing ingredients produced through biotechnology or; mandatory labelling for all products produced by biotechnology that differ from their traditional counterparts in composition, nutrition or safety (e.g. allergies).
65. The delegation of the United States stressed that the labelling of foods derived from biotechnology should be practical and equitable for all parties in that the information provided should not be misleading, i.e., the labelling of products produced through biotechnology should not imply the product is unsafe and conversely, traditional product labelling should not imply that the product is safer or superior to products produced through biotechnology. It was also noted that a major issue of debate was the threshold level that triggered the need for the labelling of foods produced through biotechnology. The delegation of Australia noted that other practical issues requiring consideration were the implications for the cost of labelling and claims relating to the use of the biotechnology process. The delegation of the United States recalled that a drafting group of the Codex Committee on Food Labelling was considering a document detailing the practicality of mandatory labelling in its development of related guidelines. The delegation of the United States urged the Committee to support the inclusion of that document as an annex to the guidelines. The Committee generally supported this approach.
66. The Committee was of the opinion that additional issues to be considered included the expansion of current initiatives to all foods derived from biotechnology in addition to those produced from plants; antibiotic resistance issues; and, coordination with other international organizations. The Committee noted that the Task Force was currently considering if “traceability” should be part of its work programme. However, the Committee also noted that “traceability” was important in terms of food safety in general and may need to be considered more broadly by the Commission and its subsidiary bodies.
67. The representative of Consumers International, noting the attention of the CCEXEC to the need for the Commission to fulfill its mandate in relation to fair trade practices and product quality, stressed that consumer perspectives should be considered in fulfilling this mandate, including with regard to the labelling of products of biotechnology. It was further noted by the representative of Consumers International that mandatory labelling should be part of ensuring “fair trade practices” so that consumers could exercise their right to information and their right to choose; and that consumer perceptions of product quality, including the fact that many consumers consider production through biotechnology relevant to product quality, should be considered.
68. In noting the Statements by the OECD Ministers and G8 Heads of Governments concerning OECD work on food safety, the Committee strongly supported the G8 statement to “encourage the FAO and WHO to organize periodic international meetings of food safety regulators to advance the process of science-based public consultations”, and stressed the importance of action being initiated on this matter well in advance of the next G8 meeting in July 2001.
69. The Committee agreed to bring the above discussions to the attention of the Codex Alimentarius Commission.
