61. The Committee considered a comparison of government comments on nutrition labelling with the relevant provisions in the Guidelines for Nutrition Labelling, with a view to determining if further action was needed in this area.
62. The Delegation of Japan informed the Committee that its recently approved regulations on nutrition labelling took into account Codex provisions on nutrition labelling and claims. The Delegation of Norway pointed out that significant differences still existed between national regulations on nutrition labelling but that it might be premature to undertake a comprehensive revision of the Guidelines.
63. The Delegation of the United States emphasized the positive response of consumers to mandatory nutrition labelling in that country, which had contributed significantly to improved consumer education while encouraging product innovation in the industry. Some delegations and the Observer from Consumers International expressed the view that mandatory nutrition labelling would be a desirable option in order to improve consumer information.
64. The Delegation of the United Kingdom also stressed the importance of updating the Nutrient Reference Values (NRVs) in the framework of the CCNFSDU, and recalled that the Scientific Committee for Foods of the EC had agreed on a list of revised NRVs.
65. The Delegation of the United States, while noting that comprehensive revision of the Guidelines would be premature at this stage, proposed to amend Section 3.2, Listing of Nutrients, in order to require the declaration of saturated fat, sugars, fibre and sodium in cases where nutrition labelling was used. The Committee concurred with this suggestion and agreed to submit a proposal for new work on a partial revision of the Guidelines on Nutrition Labelling to the Commission.
