CODEX COMMITTEE ON FOOD LABELLING
184. In introducing the report of the 12th Session of the Codex Committee on Food Labelling (ALINORM 78/22), the Chairman of the Committee, Mr. R.S. McGee, drew attention to the considerable amount of work resulting from the discussion of items on nutritional labelling and on guidelines on the labelling of bulk containers and expressed the opinion that it would be desirable to consider the late Spring or early Summer 1979 as a date for the next session of the Committee. The second session foreseen in the biennium should immediately precede the next session of the Commission and would deal primarily with the endorsement of labelling provisions in Codex Standards.
Guidelines on Date Marking of Prepackaged Foods for the Use of Codex Commodity Committees
185. The above guidelines as contained in Appendix II to the report were submitted to the Commission for adoption.
186. The delegation of Sweden stressed the importance of date marking, to gain the confidence of consumers as far as health matters were concerned. The delegation of Sweden explained the reasons for their preference for a use-by-date over the date of minimum durability, to indicate the acceptability of the food. The sale of products as prepackaged after the expiration of the use-by-date would be prohibited whereas products with an expired minimum durability date could still be sold and thus confuse the consumer. Especially in the case of perishable foods the ultimate date of use was of interest to the consumer. The delegation of sweden, therefore, proposed to amend Section 5.1 of the Guidelines to include the recommendation that first consideration should be given to the use-by-date as regards fresh foods and other perishable food products and to the date of minimum durability for foods with a long shelf-life.
187. Other delegations agreed that the main purpose of date marking was to inform the consumer. However, they cautioned on the legal implications of certain types of date marking; i.e. the application of the use-by-date might lead to destruction of still perfectly edible foods. The observer from the European Economic Community expressed his appreciation of the work of the Committee on Labelling which had influenced the EEC's consideration of the matter.
188. The Commission adopted the Guidelines on Date Marking of Prepackaged Foods for the Use of Codex Commodity Committees.
189. The Commission discussed the above guidelines (Appendix III) and agreed with the principle which governed the use of claims. However, it was noted that certain aspects required consideration by the Committee on Labelling for the sake of clarification of the meaning of the text. Special mention was made of Section 4.2 dealing with claims related to foods for use in the dietary management of specific diseases and to Section 1 - Purpose - with the aim to cover all foods. Furthermore it was pointed out that the Committee should discuss the question of responsibility to substantiate claims. The Commission requested the Committee on Food Labelling to review the guidelines on claims at its next session and to submit them again to the 13th Session of the Commission.
Use of the phrase “in accordance with the law and custom of the country in which the product is sold”
190. The Committee had expressed its concern on using the above phrase in Codex standards (para. 20, ALINORM 78/22), as it would permit countries to use different provisions and therefore not serve the purpose of harmonization. The Commission endorsed the views expressed by the Committee on Food Labelling and recommended to Commodity Committees that this phrase should be used sparingly, and, if used, that countries should supply information on their national requirements when accepting standards containing such a provision. The Commission further recommended that the Committee on General Principles should be requested to give advice on the way that might be done.
Future Work on Nutritional Labelling and Revision of the General Standard
191. The Commission was informed that it had not been possible to appoint an FAO WHO expert group to review matters related to nutritional labelling as suggested by the Committee on Labelling. It was pointed out that a large amount of valuable information had been collected by the two agencies and that funds had been made available to engage a consultant to prepare a comprehensive working document on nutritional labelling. The Canadian Secretariat urged that sufficient time be allowed for Member Governments to study the document and to submit their comments prior to the next session of the Committee on Food Labelling. The Commission agreed with the proposed approach and also accepted the view, expressed by the Chairman, that it would be appropriate to review the General Standard for the Labelling of Prepackaged Foods in the light of developments concerning labelling regulations over the past ten years.
Confirmation of Chairmanship
192. The Commission confirmed under Rule IX.10 that the Codex Committee on Food Labelling should continue to be under the chairmanship of the Government of Canada.
CODEX COMMITTEE ON FOOD ADDITIVES
193. The Commission had before it the report of the Codex Committee on Food Additives (ALINORM 78/12) including the General Standard for Irradiated Foods, the General Standard for the Labelling of Food Additives when sold as such, the Code of Practice for the Operation of Radiation Facilities used for the Treatment of Foods, and Specifications of Identity and Purity of Food Additives at Step 5 of the Codex Procedure (Appendices VII, VI, VIII and XI of ALINORM 78/12, respectively).
194. The Chairman of the Committee, Dr. G. F. Wilmink (Netherlands) gave an account of the work accomplished by the Committee since the last session of the Commission.
Matters arising from the Report of the Codex Committee on Food Additives
195. The Commission was informed that the Committee had adopted a Resolution to be brought to the attention of the Directors-General of FAO and WHO, in which the Committee had recommended that FAO and WHO find a way and appropriate financial support to ensure the continued and speedy publication of the reports and monographs of the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (see para. 24, ALINORM 78/12). A number of delegations were strongly in favour of the Resolution of the Committee. The Commission noted from the statement of the representative of WHO that FAO and WHO had recently signed an agreement which would streamline the publication of the reports and monographs of the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives. This new agreement was intended to reduce duplication and to ensure timely issue of these documents which, it was realized, were of great interest to Member Governments.
196. The Commission noted that the Codex Committee on Food Additives had carried out work on flavouring substances with the assistance of an ad hoc Working Group set up for this purpose. It was noted that an ad hoc Working Group was dealing with the question of food additive intake. Information on realistic estimates on food additive intake is of great importance in considering the endorsement of food additive provisions in food standards. The Codex Committee on Food Additives had, in particular, under consideration the question of the intake of colours used in processed foods as a number of these colours had been allocated very low acceptable daily intakes. Governments had been requested to furnish data to the Codex Committee on Food Additives. The Commission invited governments to submit available estimates of food additive intake to the Codex Committee on Food Additives in order to facilitate the work of the Committee.
197. The Commission considered a proposal of the Codex Committee on Food Additives to improve the procedure for the endorsement of food additive provisions (see paras 165–167, ALINORM 78/12). This new procedure was not considered to affect materially the existing procedures contained in the Guidelines for Codex Committees, but was thought to ensure that the Committee would have before it at the time of endorsement all necessary information on the basis of which to pass judgement concerning the acceptability of food additive provisions. The Commission decided to refer the proposed changes to the endorsement procedure to the Codex Committee on General Principles. The delegation of Norway pointed out that, in its opinion, the Codex Committee on Food Additives should have more to say in relation to policy matters regarding the use of food additives.
198. As regards the question of hydrolyzed proteins (paras 95–97, ALINORM 78/12) and food additive provisions in edible ices (paras 51–54, ALINORM 78/12), the Commission noted the conclusions of the Committee and decided to discuss these matters under agenda items 24 and 37, respectively.
199. On the request of the Committee, the Commission agreed that the Joint FAO/IAEA/WHO Expert Committee on Food Irradiation should be regarded as an Expert Body whose recommendations would guide the work of the Committee in the field of food irradiation (see paras 154–155, ALINORM 78/12). An appropriate insertion in the organogram contained in a future edition of the Procedural Manual of the Commission should be made to this effect.
200. The Commission adopted the recommendations of the Committee and those of the 23rd Session of the Executive Committee (see paras 26–32, ALINORM 78/3) designed to rationalize the elaboration, adoption and publication of specifications of identity and purity of food additives. The new procedure was intended to avoid duplication of work on specifications and to reduce the cost of their publication. However, it was agreed that government comments should be placed before the Codex Committee on Food Additives in the two working languages of the Committee rather than only in the original language received as recommended by the Executive Committee. The text of the new procedure is as follows:
Specifications published by the Secretariat of the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives are submitted to governments and interested international organizations for comments in accordance with normal procedure;
Government comments are made available to the Codex Committee on Food Additives which, through an ad hoc working group, considers the specifications in the light of comments;
Specifications found to be suitable for final adoption as Codex specifications are advanced to Step 5 in accordance with normal procedure, except that the specifications are not submitted in extenso to avoid duplication of printing costs;
Specifications not found suitable for final adoption as Codex specifications are referred to the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives together with comments received and the views of the Codex Committee on Food Additives;
Specifications adopted by the Commission are included in appropriate Codex publications by reference.
201. As regards the question of considering and endorsing maximum levels for certain industrial contaminants (e.g. heavy metals and other elemental contaminants) in foods, the Commission accepted the conclusions of the Committee and of the 23rd Session of the Executive Committee (see para. 70, ALINORM 78/3), that there would be no need to change the terms of reference of that Committee which could deal with such matters. The Commission also noted that the Committee had considered that the whole question of provisions for contaminants in Codex Standards required more attention. The hope had been expressed by that Committee that Codex Commodity Committees would pay more attention to this problem and that the findings of the FAO/WHO/UNEP Food Monitoring Programme would be made available in order to achieve this aim (see paras 165–167, ALINORM 78/12). The Commission concurred with this view.
202. The Commission was informed that the Codex Committee on Food Additives had drawn up an advisory list of food additives in soft drinks and that this list had been referred to the ad hoc Working Group on Food Additive Intake to assist that group in considering food additives of particular relevance to certain vulnerable groups.
203. In discussing the above proposed Draft Standard three delegations were of the opinion that more work was needed to secure acceptance of irradiated foods by the public and from a safety point of view and that, therefore, the above proposed Draft Standard should not be advanced to Step 6 of the Codex Procedure. Furthermore, the economic feasibility of the irradiation process still required practical demonstration. The Commission noted that the proposed Draft Standard for Irradiated Foods had been established on the basis of recommendations of the Joint FAO/IAEA/WHO Expert Committee on the Wholesomeness of Irradiated Foods as well as on those of a technical expert group convened by IAEA. The standard contained provisions for the irradiation of a limited number of foods where, on the basis of wholesomeness testing, the safety of the irradiation process had been experimentally demonstrated. The delegation of Argentina submitted comments in writing on the standard for irradiated foods for transmission to the Codex Committee on Food Additives.
204. The Commission decided to advance the Proposed Draft Standard for Irradiated Foods and the Code of Practice for the Operation of Radiation Facilities used for the Treatment of Foods to Step 6 of the Codex Procedure and agreed that Government should be requested to inform the Codex Committee on Food Additives concerning the volume of international trade in irradiated foods.
205. The Commission decided to advance the above Proposed Draft General Standard to Step 6 of the Codex Procedure.
206. The Commission adopted the specifications contained in Appendix XI of ALINORM 78/12 as recommended Codex specifications and agreed that they should be included by reference to the appropriate monographs of the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives in appropriate Codex publications.
Confirmation of the Chairmanship
207. The Commission confirmed under Rule IX. 10 that the Codex Committee on Food Additives should continue to be under the chairmanship of the Government of the Netherlands.
CODEX COMMITTEE ON PESTICIDE RESIDUES
208. The Commission had before it the report of the above Committee (ALINORM 78/24 and Corrigendum) and Government comments on Step 8 maximum residue limits contained in ALINORM 78/36, Part 6 and Add. 1, 2 and 3 thereto. The Chairman of the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues, Ir. A.J. Pieters (Netherlands) gave an account of the work accomplished by the Committee since the last session of the Commission. He also informed the Commission that the Committee would review its work at its tenth session in 1978.
Consideration of Draft Maximum Residue Limits at Step 8
209. The Commission agreed that it would not be practicable for it to discuss individual maximum residue limits in the light of Government comments at Step 8. The Commission proceeded therefore to consider whether or not the various proposals of the Committee should be advanced to Step 9 of the procedure. Government comments and proposed amendments were to be considered by the Commission in that light. The delegation of the Federal Republic of Germany was of the opinion that the Codex Procedure for the Elaboration of Codex Maximum Residue Limits was rather lengthy and needed to be streamlined as well as rendered more flexible. For example, in the Federal Republic of Germany, maximum residue limits were normally reviewed every two years, which would not be possible if a Procedure such as that adopted by Codex were followed. The Chairman of the Committee pointed out that the Codex Procedure had been already shortened and that further speeding up of the Procedure was possible by the omission of Steps 6 and 7.
210. The following is a summary of points raised during the discussion of the draft maximum residue limits at Step 8, contained in Part II, Appendix II of ALINORM 78/24:
Aldrin and Dieldrin
211. The Commission agreed that the maximum residue limit be editorially redrafted as follows: “Fruit 0.05 mg/kg”.
Azinphos-methyl
212. The Commission noted that item 2.2 should read “Apricots 2 mg/kg”. It also agreed that the maximum residue limits of 0.2 mg/kg (i.e. items 2.16, 2.17 and 2.19–2.22) should be returned to the Committee (at Step 7) pending clarification of the limit of determination of this residue.
Bromophos
213. The Commission noted that the Committee had under consideration maximum residue levels for other cereals besides wheat and that the maximum residue limit for wheat had been changed from 0.2 to 10 mg/kg on the recommendation of the 1975 Joint Meeting. The Commission decided to return the limit of 10 mg/kg in wheat to Step 6 of the Codex Procedure in order to afford Governments further opportunity for comment. It was also noted that the maximum residue limits were no longer temporary.
Captafol
214. The Commission noted that the maximum residue limits were no longer temporary.
Carbaryl
215. Some delegations pointed out that the theoretical intake of carbaryl (calculated on the basis of national food consumption data and the maximum residue limits) exceeded the ADI and that, therefore, a number of the proposed maximum residue limits would not be acceptable to their countries. Other delegations pointed out that such theoretical calculations had little value in determining the acceptability of maximum residue limits and that for that purpose estimates of the actual intake of carbaryl residues were necessary. The delegations of Japan and the Federal Republic of Germany reserved their position concerning the maximum residue limits (items 8.38 – 8.52).
Chlormequat
216. The Commission noted the request of the delegation of Poland that maximum residue limits be established for this pesticide in bread and bran.
DDT
217. The Commission noted that the Committee had issued a questionnaire (CL 1977/39) in order to establish the existing use pattern of DDT in the various parts of the world.
The Joint Meeting on Pesticide Residues had been requested to study replies received from Governments. It was the intention of the Committee to review most of its previous recommendations regarding residue limits for DDT in the light of the actual situation as regards the use of DDT in agriculture and background environmental contamination. The delegations of the Netherlands, Poland and Switzerland were of the opinion that the maximum residue limits in carcase meat and poultry (items 21.12, 21.13) should be referred back to the Committee. The Commission advanced these limits to Step 9, noting that there had been agreement between the majority of the countries on these limits at the 9th session of the Committee.
Dicofol
218. The Commission noted that some countries did not consider the general maximum residue limits in fruit and vegetable appropriate in view of the use pattern of dicofol and that, therefore, the maximum residue limits should be referred back to the Committee for further consideration. The Commission, nonetheless, advanced the maximum residue limits for fruit and vegetables (items 26.1 and 26.2) to Step 9 of the Codex Procedure.
Diquat
219. The Commission noted the request of the delegation of Poland that maximum residue limits be established for this pesticide in bread and bran.
Lindane
220. The Commission noted that the maximum residue limits for lindane were no longer temporary.
Omethoate
221. The Commission noted that the question of setting maximum residue limits for omethoate, dimethoate and formothion (three pesticides closely related through their metabolic fate) had been referred back for study by the Joint Meeting on Pesticide Residues. The Commission decided to return the maximum residue limits (items 55.1 to 55.7) to the Committee (Step 7 of the Procedure).
Paraquat
222. The Commission discussed the theoretical intake of paraquat and reached conclusions similar to those given in para. 215 above.
Status of the Draft Maximum Residue Limits considered at Step 8
223. The Commission adopted, as Recommended Maximum Residue Limits, the above Draft Maximum Residue Limits indicated in Part II, Appendix II of ALINORM 78/24 (+ Corrigendum) at Step 8 of the Procedure for the Elaboration of Codex Maximum Residue Limits, with the exception of the Draft Maximum Residue Limits given under items 2.16, 2.17, 2.19–2.22; 4.26 and 55. 1–55.7 in the same Appendix.
Consideration of Proposed Draft Maximum Residue Limits at Step 5
224. The Commission had before it a number of maximum residue limits at Step 5 of the Procedure and noted that for some (i.e. items 17.30, 20.12, 20.13, 26.5–26.8, 67.8–67.12 in Part II, Appendix II, ALINORM 78/24) the Committee had recommended the omission of Steps 6 and 7. In view of the opposition by a number of delegations to the omission of the steps, the Commission decided not to accelerate the Procedure in respect of the above items. The Chairman of the Committee pointed out that the omission of Steps 6 and 7 was one way the Committee had sought to expedite work on those pesticide residues in food, which did not appear to be contentious.
Status of the Proposed Draft Maximum Residue Limits considered at Step 5
225. The Commission decided to advance all maximum residue limits indicated as being at Step 5 in Part II, Appendix II, ALINORM 78/24 to Step 6 of the Codex Procedure.
Proposed Amendments to Recommended Maximum Residue Limits
226. The Commission decided that the new proposed maximum residue limits for lindane in cherries, grapes and plums (items 48.9, 48.11 and 48.12 in Part I, Appendix II, ALINORM 78/24) be sent to Governments for comments at Step 3 of the Codex Procedure.
227. The Commission also decided to change the definition of fenitrothion to “fenitrothion and its oxygen analogue”. Noting that the acceptable daily intake of quintozene was no longer temporary, the Commission decided that the Recommended Maximum Residue Limits at Step 9 should be amended accordingly (see Part I, B. Appendix II, ALINORM 78/24).
Matters arising from the Report of the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues
228. The Commission noted that the Committee had discussed its terms of reference in relation to possible additional work on environmental pollutants in food (see para. 389, ALINORM 76/44) and that it had concluded that it was not its proper function to consider limits for contaminants other than those which resulted from the use of pesticides (see para. 6, ALINORM 78/24). It also noted that the Executive Committee had deferred decision until the Commission had discussed this matter.
229. A number of delegations were concerned about the increase in workload which such additional work would represent both for the Committee and the Joint Meeting on Pesticide Residues. The delegation of the Netherlands suggested that pollutants requiring consideration by the Committee could be referred to the Committee on an ad hoc basis. The delegation of Poland was of the opinion that, in any event, PCBs and dioxins should be considered by the Committee. Other delegations pointed out that the real question was how to generate information on the basis of which maximum limits for industrial and environmental pollutants in food could be established. Furthermore, there was a need for the Commission to have before it a paper setting out the pollutants involved and other relevant technical information.
230. The Secretariat informed the Commission that work on environmental and other similar pollutants would involve (a) generation of basic data, (b) evaluation of data generated and (c) negotiation of internationally acceptable maximum limits and/or taking remedial action to reduce contamination. The Commission requested the Secretariat to prepare a paper on this subject for its 13th Session.
231. The Commission considered the “Guidelines for Good Agricultural Practice in the Use of Pesticides” (see Appendix VII, ALINORM 78/24) which the Committee had adopted at its last session. The delegation of the Federal Republic of Germany indicated that it had a number of improvements to suggest to the text. The Commission requested the Secretariat to consider those changes and to incorporate them in the Guidelines. It was decided that the Guidelines should be included in an appropriate future Codex publication.
232. The delegation of the Philippines was of the opinion that the Committee should consider ways of dealing with recommendations for maximum residue limits for pesticides withdrawn from the market or no longer used.
233. The delegation of Senegal stressed the importance of information included in the Canadian document on good agricultural practice in the various countries issued by the Committee.
234. The delegation of Brazil indicated that it preferred the expression of residue limits on a total product rather than on a fat basis.
Confirmation of the Chairmanship
235. The Commission confirmed under Rule IX. 10 that the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues should continue to be under the chairmanship of the Government of the Netherlands.
CODEX COMMITTEE ON FOOD HYGIENE
236. The Commission had before it the reports of the 13th (1976) and 14th (1977) sessions of the above Committee (ALINORM 78/13 and ALINORM 78/13A) and Governments comments (ALINORM 78/36, Part 10 and LIM. 10). The Rapporteur, Dr. R.W. Weik (USA), introduced the two Reports.
237. The Rapporteur pointed out that the draft code had been the subject of considerable discussion and revision at the 14th Session of the Codex Committee on Food Hygiene. In addition to the Code proper, there was attached an Annex giving current laboratory procedures and standards in several countries with established shellfish industries. It was considered that such a list could be used in developing countries which were establishing hygienic control processes for shellfish. The Rapporteur informed the Commission that the Committee was of the opinion that Steps 6 and 7 should be omitted and that the Code should be adopted at Step 8 of the Procedure.
238. The Commission noted an observation made by the delegation of France that in view of the threat to marine ecology presented by oil pollution, the Code might, at some future time, need to take such factors into account.
Status of the Code of Hygienic Practice for Molluscan Shellfish
239. The Commission agreed with the recommendation of the Codex Committee on Food Hygiene and adopted the Draft Code of Hygienic Practice as a Recommended Code at Step 8.
240. The Commission noted that the Code of Hygienic Practice for Egg Products had been adopted as a Recommended Code at its last session (ALINORM 76/44, paras 130-132).
241. The microbiological specifications at present under consideration had been recommended by the first Joint FAO/WHO/UNEP Expert Consultation on Microbiological Specifications in Foods (EC Microbiol/75/Report 1) and by a Working Group which met in conjunction with the 13th Session of the Committee. They were based on methods on which a broad measure of international agreement had already been reached.
242. The Commission noted that the same specifications were being considered by the ISO Technical Committee 34 (SC 9). The Committee was of the opinion that Steps 6 and 7 could be omitted, and that the proposed specifications could be adopted at Step 8 and attached to the Recommended Code of Hygienic Practice for Egg Products as End Product Specifications.
Status of the Microbiological Specifications for Pasteurized Egg Products
243. After a short discussion, the Commission adopted the Microbiological Specifications for Pasteurized Egg Products at Step 8 for inclusion in the Step 9 Code of Hygienic Practice for Egg Products (CAC/RCP 15-1976).
244. The Rapporteur informed the Commission that the “General Principles” had been extensively revised by a small Working Group which had met in Geneva in December 1976. After some further amendments had been made during the 14th Session of the Codex Committee on Food Hygiene, that Committee advanced the Code to Step 5 of the Procedure with a recommendation that Steps 6 and 7 be omitted.
245. The Commission noted that the delegation of Switzerland in its written comments (ALINORM 78/36 - Part 10) had made proposals for textual changes of a substantive nature. The delegation was of the opinion that a Code of such fundamental importance would benefit by following all the Steps of the Procedure. It further noted that an annex to the Code on cleaning and disinfecting had recently been elaborated and would be submitted to the next session of the Codex Committee on Food Hygiene at Step 3 of the Procedure.
Status of Revised Draft Code of Practice - General Principles of Food Hygiene
246. The Commission did not endorse the proposed omission of Steps 6 and 7 advanced the Proposed Draft Code of Practice - General Principles of Food Hygiene to Step 6 of the Procedure.
247. The Rapporteur informed the Commission that the Code had been in progress since 1972 and that the Committee had remarked with regret that during this period few comments had been received from producing developing countries.
248. The Commission noted, however, that the Code had been briefly discussed at the 3rd Session of the Coordinating Committee for Africa (ALINORM 78/28, paras 41-47) and that some delegates had expressed the view that this Code as it stood was too complex to meet the needs of developing countries. Some delegations pointed out that the Code nevertheless served as a useful guideline for the handling and processing of peanuts.
249. Reference was made to the Joint FAO/WHO/UNEP Conference on Mycotoxins, Nairobi, which had been held at about the same time as the 3rd Session of the Coordinating Committee for Africa.
250. The Commission noted that the report of the Conference had only recently become available and that it was possible that there were new developments with regard to aflatoxins control which might affect the provisions of the Code. Under these circumstances it was agreed that opportunities for further comment on the Code were necessary - particularly from producing countries - and that these comments should be sent to the Codex Committee on Food Hygiene.
Status of the Proposed Draft Code of Hygienic Practice for Peanuts (Groundnuts)
251. The Commission decided to advance the Proposed Draft Code of Hygienic Practice for Peanuts (Groundnuts) to Step 6 of the Procedure.
252. The Rapporteur informed the Commission that the Code had been brought to its present state of development by a Working Group under the chairmanship of the delegation of Canada. He also reported that the Committee was elaborating a standard for Acidified Low Acid Canned Foods and it was hoped that the two Codes could be amalgamated at Step 8.
253. The Commission took note of the observations of the delegation of Hungary which was of the opinion that further attention should be given to the blanching of products, sampling plans and threshold pH.
Status of the Proposed Draft Code of Hygienic Practice for Low Acid Canned Food
254. The Commission advanced the proposed Draft Code of Hygienic Practice for Low Acid Canned Foods to Step 6 of the Procedure.
255. The Rapporteur expressed, on behalf of the Committee, satisfaction with the present state of the Code which had been elaborated by a Working Group under the Chairmanship of the Federal Republic of Germany.
Status of the Proposed Draft Code of Hygienic Practice for Foods for Infants and Children
256. The Commission advanced the Proposed Draft Code of Hygienic Practice for Foods for Infants and Children to Step 6 of the Procedure.
Matters arising from the Report of the 14th Session of the Committee:
257. The Commission noted that the Committee, at its previous session (see ALINORM 78/13, paras 84–85) had requested the above Consultation to set out guiding principles for the establishment and application of microbiological specifications for foods. The Consultation was of the opinion that there was a problem of relating microbiological criteria to mandatory and advisory provisions in Codex documents and defined three types of microbiological criteria: standards, specifications and guidelines - as applying respectively to (a) Codex standards; (b) Codes of Practice; and (c) situations where neither (a) nor (b) above existed.
258. The Consultation also gave its opinion on the purpose and application of microbiological criteria, their composition and the interpretation of the results obtained in applying the criteria. The conclusions of the Consultation were set out in Annex II to the above-mentioned document (EC/Microbiol/77/Report 2) and also in Appendix VIII of ALINORM 78/13A. The Committee was of the opinion that the criteria should be included in a future edition of the Procedural Manual of the Commission as General Principles governing the terms of reference of the Codex Committee on Food Hygiene.
259. The delegation of Kenya thought microbiological standards for certain food products were highly difficult if not impossible to establish on an international basis because of the great variety of environmental and processing conditions in many Member Nations of the Commission and because of the inherent variability of microorganisms. In many cases, the cut-off point of high aerobic plate counts as an index of poor handling of foods was difficult to determine. For these reasons, it was better to introduce control measures to minimize infection in the market place and in the kitchen. He was also of the opinion that there was evidence that microbiological specifications served no purpose to trade except as non-justifiable trade barriers.
260. Other delegations pointed out that the Joint FAO/WHO Consultation was aware of the dangers of laying down mandatory microbiological provisions and for this reason had recommended two levels of advisory specifications. Only after long experience and the systematic accumulation of information on provisions attached to Guidelines or Codes of Practice could any assessment be made as to whether or not such specifications should be attached to standards.
261. The Commission noted that, apart from those of the delegation of Poland (see LIM. 10), no comments on the recommendation of the Consultation were available.
262. It was agreed that any further comments should be addressed to the Codex Committee on Food Hygiene so that a considered text could be submitted to the Commission at its next session.
Proposal that an FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Microbiology be established
263. The Commission noted the discussion on this subject which had taken place at the 24th Session of the Executive Committee (ALINORM 78/4, paras 51–55).
264. It endorsed the recommendation of the Executive Committee that WHO, in consultation with FAO and the Chairman of the Codex Committee on Food Hygiene, invite experts to participate in a Working Group which would meet in Geneva at the beginning of 1979 to provide, so far as commodities are concerned, advice to the Committee on microbiological criteria for raw meat and raw poultry meat, it being understood that the expenses of these experts would be borne by their governments and sponsoring agencies (see ALINORM 78/4, para. 55).
ECE Agreement on Special Equipment for the Transport of Perishable Foodstuffs (ATP)
265. The delegation of Denmark referred to the above topic (see ALINORM 78/13A, paras 94–96), consideration of which the Executive Committee had postpond to its 25th Session. The delegation pointed out that the ATP agreement did not contain any hygiene requirements, but some specifications as to the temperatures to be kept during transport, especially for frozen and quickfrozen food. The delegation pointed out that member countries would have the opportunity to make their views known at a meeting to be convened in July in Geneva which would review annexes 2 and 3 to the agreement. The delegation, therefore, considered that the ATP Agreement should not be reviewed either by the Food Hygiene Committee or the Executive Committee.
Confirmation of Chairmanship
266. The Commission confirmed under Rule IX.10 that the Codex Committee on Food Hygiene should continue to be under the chairmanship of the Government of the United States of America.
CODEX COMMITTEE ON MEAT HYGIENE
267. The Commission noted that after finalization, at the third session (1974), of the work on a Code of Hygienic Practice for Fresh Meat and a Code on Ante-Mortem and Post-Mortem Inspection of Slaughter Animals, the Committee had adjourned sine die.
268. The Commission had before it a document entitled “Views of Governments on the Possible Development of a Code of Practice on Post-Mortem Judgement of Meat” (ALINORM 78/38 and Addendum 1). The Secretariat briefly reviewed the train of events which had led to the request for comments from Governments on:
The second (1973) and third (1974) sessions of the Committee on Meat Hygiene had discussed whether work should commence on a code on post-mortem judgement of meat. In view of the difficulties which many delegations foresaw regarding the elaboration of an international code in this field, it was recommended, as a first step, that FAO and WHO convene a meeting of experts to consider the approach to the subject as well as the elaboration of a draft code.
269. At the 23rd Session of the Executive Committee (1976) the representative of the region of Europe stressed the need for, and importance of, developing a code of practice on post-mortem judgement of meat and expressed the hope that the Codex Committee on Meat Hygiene could be reconvened in 1978 or 1979 for this purpose. In order to investigate the extent to which there was considered to be a need for such a code, the Executive Committee had requested the Secretariat to issue a circular letter to Governments asking them for their views on the need for and desirability of elaborating a code on ante-mortem and post-mortem judgement of meat. Replies - predominantly in favour of developing such a code as a priority matter - had been received from twenty- six Governments.
270. During the discussion, a number of delegations of countries which had not sent in a reply to the questionnaire also stated that they were in favour of work proceeding on this proposed code. Not all delegations, however, were of the view that the development of the code was a priority matter. Some delegations also stated that the proposed code should be regarded as a follow-up, complementary to, and enhancing the value of, the Recommended International Codes of Hygienic Practice for Fresh Meat and for Ante-Mortem and Post-Mortem Inspection of Slaughter Animals.
271. In line with the recommendation of the third session of the Codex Committee on Meat Hygiene, a Joint FAO/WHO Working Group was convened in Rome, 5-7 December 1977. The Working Group had prepared a draft of a code of guiding principles relating to the taking of decisions during the course of ante-mortem and post-mortem inspection of slaughter animals and meat (“Judgement” of slaughter animals and meat).
272. The draft code had been sent to a number of experts with a request to provide comments and contributions suitable for inclusion in the document. The secretariat of FAO and WHO would, in due course, compile and collate the replies and draw up a revised version of the draft code. The intention of this procedure was to identify prior to the meeting of the Committee those items on which a general consensus appeared to exist at the international level.
273. It was thought that in this way, on the basis of the preliminary work done, only a limited number of the items to be covered by the Code would require detailed discussion by the Committee. The document would be made available to the New Zealand Secretariat in the course of 1978.
274. The Commission decided that a code on ante-mortem and post-mortem judgement should be elaborated by the Codex Committee on Meat Hygiene. The paper resulting from the Consultation of Experts mentioned above would serve as the working document for the Committee.
Proposed Draft Code of Hygienic Practice for the Inspection of Game
275. The Commission noted that during its earlier discussions on the work of the Committee on Processed Meat Products the question of the responsibility for the further elaboration of the proposed draft code of hygienic practice for the inspection of game had been deferred to this agenda item. In view of the reactivation of the Committee on Meat Hygiene, it was agreed that following a first consideration by the Committee on Processed Meat Products the document would be sent out to Governments for comments. The Meat Hygiene Committee could then consider the proposed draft code at Step 4 of the Procedure. The Commission was informed that in all probability the first draft of the game code would be ready by early 1979.
Confirmation of Chairmanship
276. The Commission confirmed under Rule IX.10 that the Codex Committee on Meat Hygiene should continue to be under the chairmanship of the Government of New Zealand.
CODEX COMMITTEE ON METHODS OF ANALYSIS AND SAMPLING
277. The Commission had before it documents ALINORM 78/23, 78/21, 78/4 and Government comments contained in 78/40 (Australia), LIM. 13 (Hungary), LIM. 14 (Spain), LIM. 7 (United Kingdom) and LIM. 9 (USA).
278. The Report of the Tenth Session (ALINORM 78/23) was introduced by the Chairman, Professor R. Lasztity. He referred to the discussions which had taken place at the last session of the Commission (ALINORM 76/44, para. 172) and subsequently at the 23rd Session of the Executive Committee (ALINORM 78/3) which had led the Committee to set up a Working Group during the session to examine and make recommendations concerning its future direction and work programme, especially with regard to the types of methods of analysis required in Codex standards.
279. One of the main recommendations of the Working Group referred to a re-classification of methods of analysis and sampling for Codex purposes into four categories. It was reported that this re-classification had already gained a measure of acceptance during discussions at other international meetings.
280. Government comments on the general recommendations of the Working Group had been sought for consideration by the Executive Committee and the Commission.
281. At its 24th Session the Executive Committee (ALINORM 78/4, paras 33-46) had considered the work of the Committee in the light of Government comments then available and as a result made the following proposals:
282. The Executive Committee had also requested the Secretariat to make any consequent amendments to the terms of reference of the Codex Committee on Methods of Analysis and Sampling to be considered by the Commission.
283. The Commission noted that further Government comments received since the 24th Session of the Executive Committee were also in general agreement with the above proposals.
284. The Commission considered the revised terms of reference proposed by the Secretariat and after some discussion agreed to the following text:
to define the criteria appropriate to Codex methods of analysis and sampling;
to serve as a coordinating body for Codex with other international groups working on methods of analysis and sampling;
to specify, on the basis of final recommendations submitted to it by the other bodies referred to in (b) above, reference methods of analysis and sampling appropriate to Codex Standards which are generally applicable to a number of foods;
to consider, amend, if necessary, and endorse, as appropriate, draft methods of analysis and sampling proposed by Codex (Commodity) Committees, except that methods of analysis and sampling for: pesticide residues in food; the assessment of microbiological quality and safty of food; and the assessment of specifications of food additives do not fall within the terms of reference of this Committee;
to elaborate sampling plans and procedures, as may be required;
to consider specific sampling and analysis problems submitted to it by the Commission or any of its Committees.
285. The Commission decided that this text should replace the present terms of reference in the Procedural Manual. Any consequential changes to the General Principles for the Establishment of Codex Methods of Analysis (pp. 69, 70, Procedural Manual, 4th Edition) would be prepared by the Secretariat for consideration at the next session of the Commission.
286. The Commission noted that a Working Group on Sampling had been established which, at the last session of the Committee, had continued its work on the elaboration of acceptance sampling plans for the determination of net contents of prepackaged commodities and on General Principles for the Selection of Codex Procedures for Sampling.
287. It was noted that the Committees on Processed Fruits and Vegetables and on Fish and Fishery Products were of the opinion that sampling plans for certain products should be so designed that the least amount of product was destroyed commensurate with retaining efficiency and that in this respect the present plans for quality criteria in prepackaged food (CAC/RM 42-1969) were considered unsuitable.
288. The Commission recognized the importance of the work on sampling which was in progress and strongly recommended that the Working Group should continue to function.
Other Matters
289. The Commission noted a statement made by the delegation of the Netherlands which urged that members of the Commission should take a more active part in the work of the Codex Committee on Methods of Analysis and Sampling.
Confirmation of Chairmanship
290. The Commission confirmed under Rule IX. 10 that the Codex Committee on Methods of Analysis and Sampling should continue to be under the chairmanship of the Government of Hungary.
CODEX COMMITTEE ON GENERAL PRINCIPLES
Confirmation of Chairmanship
291. The Commission confirmed under Rule IX. 10 that the Codex Committee on General Principles should continue to be under the chairmanship of the Government of France.
JOINT ECE/CODEX ALIMENTARIUS GROUP OF EXPERTS ON STANDARDIZATION OF QUICK FROZEN FOODS
292. The Commission had before it the Report of the Group of Experts (ALINORM 78/25 and ALINORM 78/25-Addendum). The Chairman of the Group of Experts, Mr. T. van Hiele (Netherlands gave an account of the work accomplished by the Group of Experts since the last session of the Commission.
Consideration of Draft Standard for Quick Frozen Blueberries at Step 8
293. The Commission noted that there were still some doubts concerning the Latin name to be used to describe all the cultivated varieties of blueberries. In this respect it was noted that both high and low bush blueberries were included in the standard, but that the wild variety was covered in a separate standard (i.e. bilberries).
Status of the Draft Standard for Quick Frozen Blueberries
294. The Commission adopted, as a Recommended Standard, the Draft Standard for Quick Frozen Blueberries at Step 8 of the Procedure for the Elaboration of World-Wide Codex Standards. The Commission noted that the Codex Committee on Methods of Analysis and Sampling had not endorsed the sampling plans included in the standard. It was agreed that when the Standard was published at Step 9, this should be so indicated.
Consideration of Draft Standard for Quick Frozen Leek at Step 8
295. As regards the endorsement of the Sampling Plans, the Commission decided to proceed in the same way as in the case of quick frozen blueberries.
Status of the Draft Standard for Quick Frozen Leek
296. The Commission adopted, as a Recommended Standard, the Draft Standard for Quick Frozen Leek at Step 8 of the Procedure for the Elaboration of World-Wide Codex Standards.
Consideration of Proposed Draft Standard for Quick Frozen Brussels Sprouts at Step 5
297. The question was raised as to why the Group of Experts had not considered it necessary to include maximum levels for contaminants in quick frozen foods. The Chairman of the Group of Experts pointed out that quick frozen foods were almost in their natural state, i.e. unprocessed, and that contaminants from the process of quick freezing or from packaging were unlikely to arise. This might, however, not be the case with products such as quick frozen potato chips, and the Chairman of the Group of Experts undertook to give this matter consideration.
Status of the Proposed Draft Standard for Quick Frozen Brussels Sprouts
298. The Commission advanced the above Proposed Draft Standard for Quick Frozen Brussels Sprouts to Step 6 of the Procedure for the Elaboration of World-Wide Codex Standards.
299. The Commission advanced the above two proposed Draft Standards to Step 6 of the Procedure for the Elaboration of World-Wide Codex Standards.
Consideration of Proposed Draft Standard for Quick Frozen French Fried Potatoes at Step 5
300. Several delegations were of the opinion that the list of additives needed to be reconsidered by the Group of Experts. The Commission noted that a number of additives had been included in the standard, as they were additives which were permitted in the frying oil and which could be carried over in small amounts into the quick frozen product. Furthermore, some food additives listed in the standard had also been included to cover the reformed product, which was no longer covered by the standard. It was agreed that the question of additives should be reconsidered by the Group of Experts in the light of Government comments.
301. The delegation of Poland was of the opinion that the standard should include criteria for fat spoilage, i.e. a rancidity test.
Status of the Proposed Draft Standard for Quick Frozen French Fried Potatoes
302. The Commission advanced the above Proposed Draft Standard to Step 6 of the Procedure for the Elaboration of World-Wide Codex Standards.
Consideration and Status of Draft Method of Checking Product Temperature of Quick Frozen Foods
303. The Commission adopted the above Draft Method at Step 8 of the Codex Procedure and decided that it should be included as an Annex to the Recommended International Code of Practice for the Processing and Handling of Quick Frozen Foods (CAC RCP 8-1976). It was agreed that the Code of Practice and the method should both be referred to the UNECE's Inland Transport Committee's Working Party on Standardization of Transport of Perishable Foodstuffs, for information.
Matters arising from the Report of the Group of Experts on Standardization of Quick Frozen Foods
304. The Commission noted that the Group of Experts was studying the relationship between the quality of quick frozen foods and the temperature of the foods at the time of sale as well as the influence of the duration of storage and of other factors. The Group of Experts had also stressed the need for better methods of quality evaluation. Combined efforts between Codex collaborating countries and the International Institute of Refrigeration were hoped to lead to the development of better methods of evaluation of quick frozen foods.
305. The Chairman of the Group of Experts pointed out that the Terms of Reference of the Group of Experts included coordination of work on quick frozen products. The delegation of Norway was of the opinion that this coordinating role, if at all necessary, should be limited to an endorsing type of function and that the Group of Experts should not rediscuss technical matters already resolved by other experts (e.g. the Codex Committee on Fish and Fishery Products). The Commission noted these remarks. The Secretariat undertook to ensure coordination between the various Codex bodies dealing with quick frozen foods.
306. The Commission agreed with the proposal of the Group of Experts that the Recommended Standard for Quick Frozen Strawberries (CAC/RS 52-1971) should be amended by including in Section 2.3 - Presentation, a provision for “other styles” similar to that adopted for quick frozen peaches. This involved a slight consequential amendment to section 6.1 covering the declaration of the style in conjunction with the name of the food.
307. The Commission noted that the temperature requirements of paras 5.6 and 6.3 of the Recommended International Code of Practice for the Processing and Handling of Quick Frozen Foods (CAC/RCP - 8-1976) were scheduled for reconsideration by the Group of Experts prior to the 13th Session of the Commission.
Future Work of the Group of Experts
308. The Commission discussed the future work programme of the Group of Experts in an endeavour to see whether its work on quick frozen fruits and vegetables could be concluded in the near future. It noted that in, perhaps, two more sessions, the Group of Experts would complete its current work programme indicated in the Report of its 11th Session (ALINORM 78/25).
JOINT ECE/CODEX ALIMENTARIUS GROUP OF EXPERTS ON STANDARDIZATION OF FRUIT JUICES
309. The Commission had before it the Report of the Group of Experts (ALINORM 78/14) and documents ALINORM 78/36, Part 2 and Add. 1 containing proposed amendments and observations on the Draft Standard for Non-Pulpy Blackcurrant Nectars at Step 8.
310. The Chairman of the Group of Experts, Prof. W. Pilnik, Netherlands, expressed his satisfaction with the large participation of developing countries in the work of the Group, jointly set up by UN/ECE and the Codex Alimentarius Commission. He welcomed the amendment of the work criteria adopted by the Commission to enable consideration of the importance which standards for certain products might have in specific regions. He stressed the efforts made by the Group of Experts to adhere to the work priority criteria set up by the Commission. The Chairman hoped that work could commence soon on standards for mango juice and for tropical fruit juices as indicated in the Report of the Coordinating Committee for Asia, and informed the Commission that the agenda of the forthcoming session of the Group of Experts would be amended to take into account these new developments.
311. The delegation of Canada expressed the opinion that no new work should be undertaken by the Group of Experts, except for standards for pineapple juice concentrate, mango juice and other tropical juices, which might be fully justified in terms of work priorities.
Consideration of the Draft Standard for Non-pulpy Blackcurrant Nectar at Step 8
312. In introducing the item, the Chairman explained that the Standard for Non-pulpy Blackcurrant Nectar (Appendix I to ALINORM 78/14) had been elaborated in accordance with other nectar standards. The delegation of Poland was of the opinion that a section on processing aids should be included. However, no change was made as the nectar was a mixture of the other ingredients with blackcurrant juice, and the processing aids were used only in the manufacture of that juice. The delegation of Poland proposed to reinstate the provision on a minimum of acidity and several delegation questioned the need for the addition of acids.
313. In reply to a proposal of the delegation of India to permit the use of fumaric acid, the Chairman informed the Commission that fumaric acid would be considered generally for use in fruit juices. As regards the presence of small quantities of preservative in concentrated products, the Chairman drew attention to the title of the standard which included the phrase “preserved exclusively by physical means” which ruled out the use of preservatives.
314. The delegation of Norway had proposed that the standard should provide for the possibility of producing an unsweetened product. It was recognized that from a nutritional point of view this would have its merits. However, the definition of nectars required sugars or honey to be an ingredient. Furthermore, diluted fruit juices could be declared as nectars if the addition of sugars or honey was optional.
315. It was noted that the provision for sugars should be interpreted to mean that all those sugars could be used for which standards had been elaborated by the Codex Alimentarius Commission.
316. The delegation of Norway had proposed to delete the minimum solids content and replace it by a maximum level. The Commission did not take action, since this matter had been decided by a great majority within the Group of Experts.
317. Several delegations pointed out that in this particular standard the maximum level of tin was set at 150 mg/kg whereas in other standards 250 mg/kg of tin were permitted. These delegations suggested establishing a tentative uniform level of tin of 250 mg/kg for all fruit juices until a final decision could be taken, based on the toxicological evaluation of tin compounds by the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives.
318. The Commission was informed by the Chairman that due to the nature of the product lacquered cans had to be used for non-puply blackcurrant nectar and that therefore 150 mg/kg of tin were justified. In the case of fruit juices from tropical climates, however, a higher limit for tin was required and a maximum level of 250 mg/kg of tin had been incorporated into the relevant standards.
Status of the Draft Standard for Non-Pulpy Blackcurrant Nectar
319. The Commission adopted, as a Recommended Standard, the Draft Standard for Non-pulpy Blackcurrant Nectar at Step 8 of the Procedure for the Elaboration of World-wide Codex Standards and requested the Secretariat to make some minor editorial changes.
Consideration and Status of Proposed Draft Standards for Fruit Juices and Nectars at Step 5
320. The Commission advanced the Proposed Draft Standards for Blackcurrant Juice, Concentrated Blackcurrant Juice and Puply Nectars of Certain Small Fruits (Appendices II, III and IV of ALINORM 78/14) to Step 6 of the Codex Procedure. Several delegations made comments and proposals for amendments to these standards which were noted by the Chairman for consideration at the next session of the Group of Experts.
Amendments to Standards at Step 9 of the Procedure
321. The Commission adopted the amendments proposed by the Group of Experts as given in ALINORM 78/14, Appendix VI, which were either of a consequential or editorial nature. The Chairman informed the Commission that considerable progress had been made on the methods of analysis. The Working Group on Methods of Analysis for Fruit Juices had finalized the relevant sections in a number of standards which had subsequently been endorsed by the Codex Committee on Methods of Analysis and would be published in due course.
CODEX COMMITTEE ON PROCESSED FRUITS AND VEGETABLES
322. The Commission had before it the Report of the above Committee (ALINORM 78/20) and Government comments on the Step 8 standards, contained in ALINORM 78/36, Part 3 and Addenda 1 and 2 thereto. Dr. R. Weik of the delegation of the United States of America gave an account of the work accomplished by the Codex Committee on Processed Fruits and Vegetables since the last session of the Commission.
Consideration of the Draft Standard for Canned Tropical Fruit Salad at Step 8
323. On the proposal of the delegation of Kenya, the Commission decided to add pears (Para comunis L.) in pieces, dices or slices to sections 1.2(b) and 2.1.2 as an optional ingredient in the same proportion as peaches. The delegation of Japan proposed that provision should be made for the declaration of the drained weight of canned foods. The Commission noted that this matter had been discussed by the Committee but that the Committee had not considered it necessary to provide for such a label declaration.
Status of the Draft Standard for Canned Tropical Fruit Salad
324. The Commission adopted the Draft Standard for Canned Tropical Fruit Salad as amended, at Step 8 of the Procedure for the Elaboration of World-wide Codex Standards.
325. The delegation of the Federal Republic of Germany expressed its reservation concerning the food additives provided for in these standards. The delegation of Poland concurred with this view, especially as regards modified starches in these and other standards. It also considered the limit of 250 mg/kg tin in canned carrots and pickled cucumbers to be too high, and proposed that it should be reduced to 200 mg/kg. The delegation of India indicated that, in its opinion, the use of firming agents in canned carrots was not necessary. However, it was of the opinion that a maximum level of 250 mg/kg tin was required in the standards for pickled cucumbers and canned carrots, because of the climatic conditions prevailing in some countries. The delegation of France was of the opinion that the drained weight of canned carrots should be declared on the label in view of the fact that, in this case, the packing medium was usually discarded. The delegation of Uruguay indicated that it would raise a number of questions at Step 6 of the Procedure in connection with these standards.
Status of the Proposed Draft Standards for Pickled Cucumbers, Canned Carrots and Dried Apricots
326. The Commission decided to advance the above three standards to Step 6 of the Codex Procedure.
327. As a number of delegations indicated that they wished to make comments on the proposed amendments, the Commission decided that it would not be in a position to decide to omit Steps 6 and 7 of the Codex Procedure, as recommended by the Codex Committee on Processed Fruits and Vegetables. The Commission decided to advance the amendments to Step 6 of the Codex Procedure. It was agreed that the comments raised by the delegations of Australia, United Kingdom, Japan and Hungary should be incorporated in their Step 6 comments and referred to the Codex Committee on Processed Fruits and Vegetables.
Matters arising from the Report of the Codex Committee on Processed Fruits and Vegetables
328. The Commission noted that the Committee had discussed the Sampling Plans for Prepackaged Foods (CAC/RM 42-1969) especially as regards sample size. The Commission agreed to consider this matter under item 29 of the agenda when considering the Report of the Codex Committee on Methods of Analysis and Sampling.
329. The delegation of Poland expressed concern about duplication of effort as regards the standardization of dried apricots by the UNECE as well as by the Codex Committee on Processed Fruits and Vegetables and pointed out that the standards elaborated by these two bodies were not entirely in agreement. The Commission noted the remarks of the delegation of Poland.
Future Work of the Codex Committee on Processed Fruits and Vegetables
330. The Commission discussed the future work of this Committee in an endeavour to determine whether it would be possible for the Committee to complete its work programme in the near future.
331. The delegation of Canada expressed the view that the work of the Committee should be restricted to those products outlined in the Committee's future work programme (para. 113, ALINORM 78/20) and the proposals put forward by the Coordinating Committee for Asia (ALINORM 78/15, para. 99). The delegation of India referred to paras 114 and 115 of the Report of the Codex Committee on Processed Fruits and Vegetables which included proposals for standards by Japan and Mexico and expressed the opinion that these standards should also be included in the future work programme of the Committee.
332. The Commission agreed that the future work programme of the Committee should include the items mentioned in the preceding paragraph.
Confirmation of the Chairmanship
333. The Commission confirmed under Rule IX. 10 that the Codex Committee on Processed Fruits and Vegetables should continue to be under the chairmanship of the Government of the United States of America.
CODEX COMMITTEE ON PROCESSED MEAT PRODUCTS
334. The Commission had before it the Report of the Ninth Session (1976) of the Committee on Processed Meat Products as contained in ALINORM 78/16, and Government comments on the draft standards at Step 8 and Proposed Annex B of the Code of Hygienic Practice for Processed Meat Products at Step 5 contained in ALINORM 78/36, Part 4 and Addenda 1 and 2. The Chairman of the Committee, Mr. V. Enggaard of Denmark, acted as Rapporteur.
Consideration of Draft Standard for Cooked Cured Ham at Step 8
335. The Chairman reviewed briefly the history of the document before the Commission (ALINORM 78/16, Appendix II) and pointed out that the Committee on Processed Meat Products had considered the standard at five successive meetings at Step 7. The present standard was thus the result of considerable discussion and repeated review.
336. In the course of the deliberations some important changes had been made to the standard. The Scope had been amended so as to cover in a single standard not only hams in hermetically sealed containers and heat-treated before or after sealing, but also to cover all packaged cooked cured ham products. As a result the name of the standard had been changed from “canned ham” to “cooked cured ham”.
337. A further major development in the history of the standard had been the introduction of the concept of an expression for “meat content” and subsequently the selection of “percentage protein on a fat-free basis” (PFF) as a suitable expression therefor. Following detailed study of all aspects of the matter, the Committee had agreed, at its Eighth Session, to an absolute minimum of 16.5% PFF and an average value of 18.0% PFF combined with a zonal sampling system. At its Ninth Session, however, the Committee had reconsidered the question and had agreed that only an absolute minimum figure for protein on a fat-free basis (with a correction for added gelatine) should be provided for in the standard.
338. In the discussion of the standard, several delegations expressed themselves in favour of re-introducing the concept of a minimum average PFF-value (18%) combined with a cut-off point at 16.5% PFF. It was thought that this was not a substantive change to the present standard, provided that the proposed figures were not associated with a mandatory zonal sampling system, as had been endorsed in principle by the Codex Committee on Processed Meat Products at its Ninth Session (ALINORM 76/23, para. 26. The delegation of the Federal Republic of Germany considered that the cut-off point should be 18%.
339. The delegation of Japan held the view that the standard should apply as originally formulated - to canned hams only - more especially as, in a number of ways, the requirements for canned hams regarding heat-treatment, optional ingredients, food additives, labelling and storage differed substantially from the broad group of products presently covered by the standard. The delegation expressed particular concern with regard to the maximum levels allowed for nitrates and nitrites.
340. The delegations of the Federal Republic of Germany and Sweden stated their objections regarding the use of certain additives. The delegation of Sweden further pointed out its reservations with regard to certain labelling provisions: the name of the food, storage instructions, and lot identification. The delegation of France reconfirmed its position with regard to the standard as contained in its written comments (ALINORM 78/36, Part 4). The delegation of the Netherlands was of the opinion that where appropriate the name of the product should include the designation “Y added”, Y applying to any food (optional ingredient) likely to impart to the ham some organoleptic characteristic (sub-section 6.1.2). The various Government comments were contained in document ALINORM 78/36, Part 4 and Addenda 1 and 2.
341. Following a full discussion the Commission ultimately agreed to the following nonsubstantive amendment:
“3.4 - Meat Content
- Average percentage meat-protein on fat-free basis ≥ 18.0%
- Minimum percentage meat-protein on fat-free basis = 16.5% (absolute minimum)
(For canned products the percentage of meat-protein is calculated on the total
content of the can and corrected for gelatine, if added - see sub-section 7.4)”.
Status of the Draft Standard for Cooked Cured Ham
342. The Commission adopted, as a Recommended International Standard, the Draft Standard for Cooked Cured Ham, as amended, at Step 8 of the Procedure for the Elaboration of World-Wide Codex Standards. The Chairman noted the spirit of compromise which had prevailed during the elaboration and at the final adoption of the standard. He requested the Committee on Processed Meat Products to follow closely the acceptance by Governments of the standard. If, in due course, on the basis of analysis of Government acceptances, a need for revision of certain provisions of the standard was identified, a proposal for amendment could be made to the Commission.
Consideration of Draft Standard for Cooked Cured Pork Shoulder at Step 8
343. The Commission had before it the above Draft Standard as contained in Appendix III to ALINORM 78/16. The Chairman observed that the course of development of the present standard was closely linked with that of the standard for Cooked Cured Ham; it had been considered four times at Step 7 by the Commodity Committee.
344. The Commission noted that the statements made by the delegations of France, Federal Republic of Germany, Japan, Netherlands and Sweden regarding certain provisions in the standard for Cooked Cured Ham applied equally to the Draft Standard for Cooked Cured Pork Shoulder (see also paras 339–340 of this Report).
345. The Commission agreed to amend the provision on meat content to bring it into line with the revised standard for Cooked Cured Ham. There was, however, some discussion on the appropriate level for the minimum percentage meat-protein on a fat-free basis (PFF). The delegation of Denmark proposed that the minimum PFF values for Cooked Cured Pork Shoulder should be 1% lower than those required for Cooked Cured Ham, namely an average of 17.0% and a cut-off point at 15.5%, due to the average difference between raw ham (22% PFF) and raw pork shoulder (21% PFF).
346. The Commission noted that in the standard before it the absolute minimum PFF had been set at 16.0%. It was agreed to retain this figure and to amend sub-section 3.4 as follows:
“3.4 - Meat Content
- Average percentage meat-protein on fat-free basis ≥ 17.5%
- Minimum percentage meat-protein on fat-free basis = 16.0% (absolute minimum)
(For canned products the percentage meat-protein is calculated on the total
content of the can and corrected for gelatine, if added - see sub-section 7.4)”.
Status of the Draft Standard for Cooked Cured Pork Shoulder
347. The Commission adopted, as a Recommended International Standard, the Draft Standard for Cooked Cured Pork Shoulder, as amended, at Step 8 of the Procedure for the Elaboration of World-Wide Codex Standards. The Committee on Processed Meat Products was requested to follow also for this standard the progress on acceptances (see para. 342 of this Report).
Consideration of Draft Standard for Cooked Cured Chopped Meat at Step 8
348. The Commission had before it the above Draft Standard as contained in Appendix IV to ALINORM 78/16. It was noted that the delegations of France, Federal Republic of Germany and Sweden had reservations regarding the use of certain substances listed in the food additives section. A further reservation by the delegation of Sweden on various food labelling provisions was also noted. The various Government comments were contained in document ALINORM 78/36, Part 4 and Addenda 1 and 2.
Status of the Draft Standard for Cooked Cured Chopped Meat
349. The Commission adopted, as a Recommended International Standard, the Draft Standard for Cooked Cured Chopped Meat at Step 8 of the Procedure for the Elaboration of World-Wide Codex Standards.
Consideration of Annex B of Code of Hygienic Practice for Processed Meat Products at Step 5
350. The Commission considered the above document entitled “Preservation of Meat Products Heat-Treated Prior to Packaging (Open Pack Meat Products)”. It was noted that following the decision of the Committee on Processed Meat Products to expand the Scope of the Standards for Cooked Cured Ham, Pork Shoulder and Chopped Meat to cover products “packaged in any suitable packaging material” work on an additional part to the Processed Meat Products Code had been initiated, in order also to cover open pack meat products.
Status of Annex B of Code of Hygienic Practice for Processed Meat Products
351. The Commission advanced the document (Annex B) to Step 6 of the Codex Procedure. A recommendation made by the Committee on Processed Meat Products to omit Steps 6 and 7 of the Procedure was considered but not accepted in view of a number of proposals to amend substantially several paragraphs of the document.
Matters arising from the Report of the Ninth Session of the Committee
- Non-meat Protein in Meat Products
352. The Commission noted the interest of the Committee to consider, as part of its future work, the use of non-meat protein in meat products (ALINORM 78/16, para. 78). It was agreed to postpone discussion on this matter until later during the session as part of the general consideration of the need for developing international standards for vegetable proteins (see para. 494 of this Report).
- Change to the Terms of Reference of the Committee
353. The Commission noted that the Executive Committee had considered a proposal by the Committee on Processed Meat Products to extend its Terms of Reference to include poultry meat products and to change the name of the Committee to “Codex Committee on Processed Meat and Poultry Products”.
354. Following instructions of the Executive Committee, the Secretariat had requested Governments to comment on the need to establish standards for processed poultry meat products. The replies from Governments indicated that there was almost general consensus on including poultry meat products in the Committee's Terms of Reference.
355. The Commission agreed to change the name of the Committee to: “Codex Committee on Processed Meat and Poultry Products”. It further agreed to amend the Terms of Reference to read: “To elaborate world-wide standards for processed meat products, including consumer packaged meat, and for processed poultry meat products”.
356. The delegation of Japan stated that in its view the Terms of Reference as revised would allow the Committee to undertake work on a consumer packaged fresh poultry meat, to which it was opposed.
357. The Chairman of the Committee informed the Commission that some delegations had proposed that the Committee establish standards for boneless meat. It was decided to discuss this matter when considering the deliberations of the Coordinating Committee for Europe on the issue (see para. 180 of this Report).
358. In the Committee on Processed Meat Products, the question had been raised as to whether work on mechanically deboned meat and on high and low temperature rendered meat, which the majority of the Committee was in favour of undertaking, properly fell within the Committee's Terms of Reference.
359. The Commission concurred with the conlusion of the Executive Committee that the proposed work fell within the Terms of Reference of the Committee. The delegation of Japan expressed the view that consumer packaged mechanically deboned meat should be regarded as fresh meat and thus fell outside the Terms of Reference of the Committee.
- Code of Hygienic Practice for Game
360. The Committee had agreed on the need to establish a specific Code of Hygienic Practice to cover game moving in international trade; a working group had been formed to draw up a draft text.
361. The Commission agreed to the development of the Code. It noted, however, that elsewhere during the session the possible reactivation of the Committee on Meat Hygiene would be considered. It was agreed to await the discussion on this matter before deciding which Committee should further be charged with the development of the Code (see para. 275 of this Report).
Confirmation of Chairmanship
362. The Commission confirmed under Rule IX. 10 that the Codex Committee on Processed Meat Products should continue to be under the chairmanship of the Government of Denmark.
CODEX COMMITTEE ON FISH AND FISHERY PRODUCTS
363. The Commission had before it the Reports of the Twelfth and Thirteenth Session (1976 and 1977) of the Codex Committee on Fish and Fishery Products (ALINORM 78/18 and ALINORM 78/18A) and documents CX/FFP 77/6, 7 and 8, amendments to the Code of Practice for Smoked Fish (CL 1978/12) and Government comments on the draft standards at Step 8 and the codes at Step 5, contained in ALINORM 78/36, Part 5 and Addendum 1 and LIM. 15. The Chairman of the Committee, Dr. O.R. Braekkan of Norway, acted as Rapporteur.
Consideration of Draft Standard for Canned Sardines and Sardine-type Products at Step 8
364. The Commission considered the above Draft Standard as contained in Appendix IV to ALINORM 78 18A. The Rapporteur expressed satisfaction at the fact that the Committee had finally reached agreement on this standard. This was due, to a large extent, to a meeting of an ad hoc working group hosted by France in Nantes which had cleared up a series of problems existing regarding the defects table of the Standard.
365. The delegation of the Federal Republic of Germany in its written comments had proposed to revise the Scope of the Standard by making a distinction between speciality products packed in sauces and those in other packing media. Associated with this, the delegation further proposed minimum requirements for drained weight or washed drained weight. The Commission was informed that the Committee had considered this question, but had made no change as the method for determining washed drained weight was not yet fully tried out. It was thought that following finalization of the method the Committee would review the matter in a broad context. It was decided not to make any of the proposed amendments.
366. The Commission discussed proposals to include in the list of species Engraulis mordax - for which production data were given - and Sardinella longiceps, for which no trade figures were available. It was decided not to extend the list of species at this stage. At a later date, such an enlargement could be reconsidered on the basis of recommendations by the Committee, as a Step 9 amendment. (See also ALINORM 78/18, para. 71).
367. The delegation of France stated that, in its opinion, the list of species (2.1.2) covered too broad a range of fish which could place the consumer at a disadvantage with regard to making a sound choice between different products. It was pointed out that the present standard was a group standard (norme tribale) and that the labelling section contained adequate provisions to safeguard the consumer.
368. The Commission noted the reservations of the Federal Republic of Germany and Poland regarding the use and description of certain food additives.
369. The Commission considered a proposal to amend editorially the provision for the name of the product and agreed to the following text:
“6.1.1 The name of the product shall be:
“Sardines” (to be reserved exclusively for Sardina pilchardus (Walbaum)); or
“X sardines” where “X” is the name of a country, a geographic area, the species, or the common name of the species in accordance with the law and custom of the country in which the product is sold, and in a manner so as not to mislead the consumer.”
(Note: the remainder of the text of 6.1.1 was deleted).
Status of the Draft Standard for Canned Sardines and Sardine-type Products
370. The Commission adopted the Draft Standard for Canned Sardines and Sardine- type products, as amended, at Step 8 of the Procedure for the Elaboration of World-Wide Codex Standards.
Consideration of Draft Standard for Quick Frozen Fillets of Hake at Step 8
371. The Commission considered the above Draft Standard as contained in Appendix II to ALINORM 78/18A. It noted the written comments of the Federal Republic of Germany on the Scope and Additives Sections and on Annexes A and B. The Commission was informed that at a recent meeting - Technical Consultation on the Latin American Hake Industry - in Uruguay, the technological aspects of hake processing had been considered and the standard had been well received.
Status of the Draft Standard for Quick Frozen Fillets of Hake
372. The Commission adopted the Draft Standard for Quick Frozen Fillets of Hake at Step 8 of the Procedure for the Elaboration of World-Wide Codex Standards.
Consideration of Draft Standard for Quick Frozen Lobsters at Step 8
373. The Commission had before it the above Draft Standard as contained in Appendix VII to ALINORM 78/18A. The Commission noted that the Committee had agreed that the title of the standard should in English be restricted to the generic term “lobster”. In the titles of the French and Spanish versions of the standard, however, the various families of lobsters covered by the standard: lobsters, rock lobsters, spiny lobsters and slipper lobsters, would be enumerated as before. The delegation of Cuba pointed out the inconsistency between versions of the standard in the three languages in using the term “langosta” to describe different genera and families. The delegation submitted an amendment to the labelling provisions which would correct this, but it was not adopted by the Commission.
374. The Commission considered a proposal of the FAO Fisheries Department to amend the Spanish title to take account of commonly used terminology. It further considered a proposal by the delegation of Cuba to restrict the title in Spanish - as in the English version - to “langostas” only. It was decided not to delete any of the terms from the Spanish title of the Standard but to change the sequence to “langostas, bogavantes y escilaros”.
Status of the Draft Standard for Quick Frozen Lobsters
375. The Commission adopted the Standard for Lobsters - with the change to the title in the Spanish version - at Step 8 of the Procedure for the Elaboration of World-Wide Codex Standards.
Consideration and Status of Proposed Draft Standard for Canned Mackerel and Jack Mackerel at Step 5
376. The Commission considered the above document contained in Appendix III to ALINORM 78/18A at Step 5 of the Procedure and decided to advance it to Step 6. It was noted that Denmark had hosted an ad hoc meeting to test and amend the defect tables of the standard. This had resulted in considerable progress in the elaboration of the standard.
Consideration of Draft Code of Practice for Frozen Fish at Step 8
377. The Commission considered the above document (CX/FFP 77/8) at Step 8 of the Procedure. It was noted with satisfaction that in the development of codes for fish and fishery products there was close collaboration between the Codex Committee on Fish and Fishery Products, the Codex Committee on Food Hygiene, and the FAO Fisheries Department. The codes were advisory documents which had been found to be of particular importance to developing countries with emerging fisheries and also had found a great deal of use in the fishery industry of developed countries.
378. A proposal, contained in ALINORM 78/36, Part 5, to amend a provision on the relative humidity in the freezer store (sub-section 5.1.2.14) was considered and agreed to.
Status of the Draft Code of Practice for Frozen Fish
379. The Commission adopted the Code for Frozen Fish, as amended, as a Recommended International Code at Step 8 of the Procedure.
Consideration and Status of Proposed Draft Code of Practice for Shrimps and Prawns at Step 5
380. The Commission adopted the above document (CX/FFP 77/7) at Step 5 of the Procedure. It concurred with the recommendation of the two Committees to omit Steps 6 and 7 and adopted the Code at Step 8 of the Procedure as a Recommended International Code. It was noted that in due course - following a further round of government comments - microbiological specifications for frozen cooked peeled ready-to-eat shrimps and prawns would be annexed to the Code.
Consideration of Proposed Draft Code of Practice for Smoked Fish at Step 5
381. The Commission considered the above document (CX/FFP 77/6) at Step 5 of the Procedure, taking into account some substantive changes made to the code at the last session of the Committee, as listed in CL 1978/12 (FFP), and further taking into account some written comments on one of these changes (ALINORM 78/36, Part 5-Addendum 1). The delegation of Senegal drew the Commission's attention to the value of the draft code as an example and a model for traditional practices in Western Africa.
Status of the Proposed Draft Code of Practice for Smoked Fish
382. The Commission decided to adopt the Code for Smoked Fish at Step 5 of the Procedure. It was noted that the Committee had proposed that also for this Code Steps 6 and 7 could be omitted. Several delegations, however, held the view that the provision on the prevention of outgrowth and toxin formation of Clostridium botulinum needed further consideration by the Committee on Food Hygiene. Furthermore, advice on the prevention of the formation of histamin, particularly in scombroid fishes (fatty fish) should be covered by the code. The Commission, therefore, decided not to advance the Code beyond Step 6.
Consideration and Status of Proposed Draft Codes for Lobsters and for Salted Fish at Step 5
383. The Commission considered the above documents (ALINORM 78/18A, Appendices X and XI - not attached to the report) and decided to advance them to Step 6 of the Procedure.
Consideration of Revision of Recommended International Standard for Canned Pacific Salmon
384. The Commission considered a proposal by the Committee to revise the above named standard (CAC/RS 3-1969). It was noted that this document had been one of the first standards to be adopted by the Commission. Since that time views on certain provisions had changed and an up-dating of the standard was required. The Commission concurred with the proposal.
Review of the Direction of the Work of the Committee
385. The Chairman noted that the work of the Committee had been recognized as being of considerable significance for developing and developed countries alike. Evidence for this was attested by the large number of delegations attending sessions of the Committee and the active participation of a great number of delegates in the debates. The present programme of work of the Committee met with general approval. Governments, in particular those of developing countries, were requested to present such proposals for new work they might have for consideration by the Committee at its next session.
Confirmation of Chairmanship
386. The Commission confirmed under Rule IX.10 that the Codex Committee on Fish and Fishery Products should continue to be under the chairmanship of the Government of Norway.
CODEX COMMITTEE ON FATS AND OILS
387. The Commission had before it the Report of the Ninth Session of the Codex Committee on Fats and Oils as contained in ALINORM 78/17. The report was introduced by Mr. F.S. Anderson who acted as Rapporteur on behalf of Mr. A.W. Hubbard, Chairman of the Committee.
388. The Rapporteur pointed out the amendments made in the course of the revision of the above standard contained in Appendix II to ALINORM 78/17.
389. The delegation of the Federal Republic of Germany expressed doubts with regard to the intended extension of the Scope of the standard. Several delegations expressed the view that the list of food additives was very extensive and they made proposals for amendments to and deletions in this section. It was pointed out that for flavours and colours for which an ADI had been allocated a maximum level should be established. Attention was drawn to the need to consider in an appropriate way provisions for residues from catalysts such as nickel. Some delegations were of the opinion that the standard should contain an indication that liquid and solid products were covered by it. A clear provision should be incorporated requiring the absence of off-flavours and rancidity to safeguard the consumer.
390. A number of delegations made reference to matters of interest arising from the Report of the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Consultation on the Role of Fats and Oils in Human Nutrition and specifically to erucic acid. In this context it was noted that Governments would be requested to comment on the report in the light of a position paper issued by the Secretariat and that these comments would be discussed by the Tenth Session of the Committee.
391. Several questions were raised concerning the labelling provisions of the standard, e.g. declaration of specific names of fats and oils in mixtures, different requirements for date marking of products packaged in various types of containers resulting in a different shelf-life. It was agreed that the Rapporteur would convey all comments made by the Commission to the next session of the Committee.
Status of the Revised Text of the General Standard for Edible Fats and Oils not covered by Individual Standards
392. The Commission advanced the Revised Text of the General Standard for Edible Fats and Oils not covered by individual standards to Step 6 of the Codex Procedure.
393. In introducing the Proposed Draft Standards for Coconut Oil, Palm Oils, Palm Kernel Oil, Grapessed Oil and Babassu Oil (Appendices VI to X of ALINORM 78/17) the Rapporteur drew attention to the Section relevant to the work of this Committee in ALINORM 78/8. He stated that these standards were being elaborated primarily at the request of the producing countries which were mainly developing countries.
394. The delegation of India commented exclusively on technical matters concerning the standards for Coconut Oil and Palm Oils. The Rapporteur took note that these comments would be submitted in writing to the next session of the Committee.
Status of the Proposed Draft Standards for Coconut Oil, Palm Oils, Palm Kernel Oil, Grapeseed Oil and Babassu Oil
395. The Commission advanced the Standards for Coconut Oil, Palm Oils, Palm Kernel Oil, Grapessed Oil and Babassu Oil to Step 6 of the Codex Procedure.
Amendments to Step 9 standards
396. The Rapporteur informed the Commission that the Committee had agreed to the amendment of Step 9 Standards to include provisions on date marking, storage instructions and lot identification, in accordance with the relevant provisions which had been incorporated into the revised text of the General Standard for Fats and Oils. The proposed amendments were of a consequential nature. However, it was pointed out that the Revised General Standard was only at Step 6 and would be reconsidered by the Committee in the light of further Government comments which might result in amending these provisions. The Commission, therefore, concluded that it was premature to amend the Step 9 standards and that the amendments should be decided upon at the time when the revised text of the General Standard was for adoption at Step 8.
Consideration of the Scope of the Draft Standard for “Reduced-Fat Margarine”
397. The Committee had considered at its Ninth Session the Draft Standard for “Low Fat Spreads” at Step 7 which had been subsequently amended to read tentatively “Reduced-Fat Margarine” It had been pointed out that the fat component of reduced-fat products on the market contained fats and oils of vegetable origin and milk-derived products in a wide range of proportions. The Committee had discussed whether the standard should cover only products which were not mainly derived from milk fat, analogous to the standard for margarine or whether it should also cover those products in which the fat component was mainly or solely milk-derived.
398. As the Committee had recognized, however, that there might be a difficulty concerning the question of whether the Milk Committee or the Committee on Fats and Oils was the appropriate body to deal with the latter products, the Commission had been requested to decide under which Committee's terms of reference the products which were mainly or solely milk-derived would fall.
399. It was noted that the technological aspects of the manufacture of these products, including the use of food additives, were similar to those of other spreads with a reduced fat content.
400. Several delegations expressed the view that better expertise on these matters would be available in the Committee on Fats and Oils and that its terms of reference could be slightly amended if necessary, to cover the whole range of reduced-fat products. It was further stated that the Milk Committee had a different philosophy towards food manufacture, especially in the field of food additives. These views were supported by a considerable number of delegations. However, other delegations pointed out that the Milk Committee should consider the issue before the Commission took any decision.
401. At its forthcoming session the Milk Committee would discuss imitation milk products and could in this context express its views on the aspects of standardization of fat- reduced products, the fat component of which was mainly or solely derived from milk products.
402. The Commission agreed that the Committee on Fats and Oils should reconsider the inclusion of these products in the Scope section of the draft standard under elaboration in the light of the deliberations of the Milk Committee.
Confirmation of Chairmanship
403. The Commission confirmed under Rule IX.10 that the Codex Committee on Fats and Oils should continue to be under the chairmanship of the Government of the United Kingdom.
