88. The Commission approved the elaboration of new standards and related texts as summarized in Appendix VI to this report and made the following observations on the elaboration of the following texts:
89. The Commission recalled that at its last Session it discussed the establishment of a new Task Force on Foods derived from Biotechnology and asked Japan to prepare a project document and draft Terms of Reference. Noting the view of the 54th Session of the Executive Committee[55], the Commission agreed to establish a new Ad Hoc Intergovernmental Task Force on Foods derived from Biotechnology with the understanding that its final report should be submitted to the Commission in 2009. It also agreed that a Circular Letter be issued to solicit specific proposals for new work and to define priorities and that comments received would be distributed as a working document for the consideration by the first session of the Task Force. The Commission adopted the Terms of Reference with a few amendments (attached as Appendix VIII to this report).
90. The Commission noted the willingness of the delegation of Japan to host the new Task Force subject to confirmation, in coming months, of the availability of funds. The delegation stressed that future work by the new Task Force should be based on the achievement of the previous Task Force.
91. The Commission noted that the issues concerning potential areas for future work including “cloned animals” and “bioactive substances” would be clarified and discussed in the new Task Force.
92. The Commission noted the view of the 54th Session of the Executive Committee that a Codex Standard for Ginseng Products could be initially developed by the Coordinating Committee for Asia although it could not reach a conclusion on the further development of the Standard.[57]
93. The Delegation of Malaysia noted that ginseng products might be considered as “functional food” and in this regard, proposed the holding of a FAO/WHO Expert Consultation on Functional Foods addressing food regulatory issues related to this category of foods which might facilitate the elaboration of the Standard.
94. The Commission approved the new work with the understanding that the Coordinating Committee for Asia would undertake initial work on the elaboration of a Codex Standard inclusive to all varieties of ginseng and applicable to ginseng products consumed as foods and not as medicinal drugs. The decisions as to whether the Standard should be finalized as a regional or international Standard and if the latter was the case, which Committee should finalize the Standard would be taken by the Commission after adoption at Step 5.
95. The Commission noted the recommendation of the 54th Session of the Executive Committee that new work on both Standards should be undertaken by the Coordinating Committee for Asia and, if required, finalized by the Committee on Cereals, Pulses, and Legumes. The question on whether the Standards should be finalized as regional or international Standards could be decided when they reached Step 5.[60]
96. The Commission noted that the two Standards referred to two different products particularly in respect of processing methods and the raw materials involved. However, in view of its previous decision to develop more horizontal standards to cover a wider range of products or group of products as opposed to specific and detailed individual standards, the Commission agreed to request Coordinating Committee for Asia to consider the possibility and implications of broadening the scope to have a single Standard applicable to all fermented soybean paste related-products including the proper titles of the Standards.
97. The Commission entrusted the initial elaboration of both Standards to the Coordinating Committee for Asia and, if required, finalization by the Committee on Cereals, Pulses, and Legumes. However, the decision on whether the texts should be finalized as regional or international Standards would be decided after adoption at Step 5.
98. The Commission agreed that the comments of the 54th Session of the Executive Committee[61] would be taken into account by the Committee in the elaboration of the appendices.
99. The Commission agreed to refer the comments of the 54th Session of the Executive Committee[62] to the Committee on Food Additives and Contaminants.
100. The Delegation of the United States expressed the view that the regular review of the Guidelines specified in the Guidelines themselves was not consistent with the principle of the Critical Review and should be reconsidered. The Delegation also pointed out that the need for the revision of the Guidelines should be reconsidered in the light of the work priorities of the Committee.
101. The Delegation of Ireland, speaking on behalf of the Member States of the European Union present at the session, stated that the revision of the Guidelines would be necessary in the future in order to improve their internal coherence. However, the Delegation proposed to defer it until 2007 as the latest amendments had been adopted in 2003.
102. The Chairperson, referring to the discussions of the Executive Committee, recalled that the general issue of the workload of Codex Committees should be taken into account when considering new work. The Chairperson proposed not to endorse new work on the revision of the Guidelines and to hold this matter at the Commission for further consideration by the 28th Session. The Commission agreed with this proposal.
103. The Commission approved the discontinuation of work as summarized in Appendix VII to this report and made the following observations:
104. The Commission recalled that the Proposed Draft Amendment had been considered at the 23rd, 24th and 26th sessions of the Commission and that no consensus had been reached. The 26th Session had returned the Proposed Draft to the Committee on Fish and Fishery Products for further consideration. The Committee had recognized that there were no new elements put forward in order to resolve the issue, and had recommended that the Executive Committee discuss whether to discontinue work or to propose other appropriate action. The 54th Session of the Executive Committee had recognized that there was no consensus and that the proposal to discontinue work would require further discussion by the Commission.
105. The Delegation of Chile opposed discontinuation of work since all the requirements of the current procedure for the inclusion of new species in Codex standards had been followed, and there were no scientific or technical justification to prevent the inclusion of this species in the Standard. The Delegation also stressed the considerable efforts of Chile to provide all relevant information in order to comply with the procedure and the economic impact of the failure to include Clupea bentincki in the Standard. This position was supported by several delegations.
106. The Delegation of Morocco supported discontinuation of work as there was no consensus on the amendment to the standard, although it had been considered at several sessions of the Committee and the Commission, and there would be no merit in returning it to the Committee for further discussion. The Delegation stressed the need to revise the procedure for the inclusion of species and the labelling provisions in the current Standard for Canned Sardines and Sardine-Type Products, as they could create substantial confusion on the nature of the products covered by the Standard. This position was supported by several delegations.
107. The Delegation of the European Community supported discontinuation of work on the inclusion of species until such time as the procedure had been revised, and stressed the problems related to the current procedure.
108. Several delegations stressed the need to adhere to the current procedure, as adopted by the Commission, in order to ensure the credibility of the standard-setting process that should be based on clear rules and criteria.
109. The Chairperson proposed to temporarily defer a decision on the Proposed Draft Amendment pending revision of the current procedure for the inclusion of species, and to reconsider this issue at a later date. Several delegations objected to this proposal.
110. The Commission recognized that there was no consensus on the discontinuation of work and agreed to return the Proposed Draft Amendment to the Committee on Fish and Fishery Products, where it had been held at Step 4 pending advice from the Commission. The Delegation of Morocco objected to this decision.
|
[53] ALINORM 04/27/9; ALINORM
04/27/4 paras 4-33. [54] ALINORM 04/27/09 Appendix I (Project Proposal by Japan); LIM.9 (Comments of Argentina, Australia, Canada, Hungary, Indonesia, Mexico, New Zealand, USA, Venezuela, BIO, Croplife International, 49th Parallel Biotechnology Consortium, Greenpeace International); LIM.11(Comments of the EC) [55] ALINORM 04/27/4, paras 5 -10 [56] ALINORM 04/27/9, Appendix II and LIM.26 (revised project document on a proposal for new work for a Codex Standard for Ginseng Products). [57] ALINORM 04/27/4, paras 11 - 14. [58] ALINORM 04/27/9, Appendix III. [59] ALINORM 04/27/9, Appendix IV. [60] ALINORM 04/27/4, paras 15 - 17. [61] ALINORM 04/27/4, paras 18-19. [62] ALINORM 04/27/4, para. 22. [63] ALINORM 04/27/18, para. 7; LIM.16 (Comments of Chile); LIM.22 (Comments of Indonesia) |
