22. 12. 86 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 328/27
Opinion on the proposal for a Council Directive amending Directive 79/112/EEC on the
approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the labelling, presentation and
advertising of foodstuffs for sale to the ultimate consumer (*)
(86/C 328/11)
On 29 April 1986 the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee,
under Article 100 of the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, on the
abovementioned proposal.
The Section for Protection of the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Affairs, which
was responsible for preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on
1 and 2 September 1986 in the light of the report by Mrs Dore.
At its 239th plenary session (meeting of 17 September 1986), the Economic and Social
Committee adopted the following opinion by a majority, with four abstentions:
1. General comments
1.1. By eliminating national derogations concerning
labelling, allowed under Directive 79/112/EEC, and
by introducing new horizontal labelling rules made
necessary by technological, economic and social devel-
opments, this proposal for a directive aims to contribute
to the completion of the internal market and to help
ensure better and identical consumer information
throughout the Community.
1.2. If an internal Community market is to be estab-
lished, a high level of information is required to ensure
fair cdmpetition between manufacturers and to enable
consumers to make informed choices.
1.3. The proposal for a directive also extends the
number of cases where labelling measures can be adopt-
ed under a simplified procedure. Paragraphs 3, 6, 8, 9,
l l , 15 and 17 of Article 1 of the current proposal for a
directive specify new cases in addition to those already
provided for in Directive 79/112/EEC (Articles 6 (4) (d),
6 (5) (b) second indent, 7 (1) (3), 8 (4) final paragraph, 9
(4) final paragraph, 16 (2) final paragraph and 19).
1.4. The Committee feels that the increase in the.
number of labelling measures which can be adopted
under a simplified procedure is justified by the technical
nature of the measures in question and by the need to
speed up the process of harmonization. The Committee
is not, however, in favour of the new simplified pro-
cedure introduced by Article 1 (20) of the proposal for
a directive, and in this connection would refer to the
comments set out in point 3.6 of the Preliminary Draft
Report of the Section for the Protection of the Environ-
(J) OJ No C 194, 23. 5. 1986, p. 5.
ment, Public Health and Consumer Affairs on the Com-
mission communication to the Council and to the Euro-
pean Parliament entitled Completion of the Internal
Market: Community Legislation on Foodstuffs (rappor-
teur: Mr Hilkens).
2. Specific comments
2.1. Article 1, paragraph 1 (extension of the scope
of the directive to cover restaurants, hospitals, canteens
and other similar mass caterers)
2.1.1. The Committee endorses this provision, which
extends the field of application of Community labelling
and presentation rules to cover foodstuffs used by mass
caterers. This will help to ensure clear information on
foodstuffs in a fast-growing sector.
2.1.2. In view of the increasing number of people
taking meals outside the home the Committee would
like to see common principles and rules governing con-
sumer information on meals provided by mass caterers
laid down in the near future.
2.2. Article 1, paragraphs 4 and 5 (mandatory indi-
cation of direct treatment with ionizing radiation)
2.2.1. The Committee appreciates the value of the
Commission proposal, which will enable consumers to
identify foodstuffs treated with ionizing radiation (X
or gamma rays, or beams of accelerated electrons).
2.2.2. Given the present lack of Community legis-
lation authorizing this type of treatment, and also in
order to take account of differences in national legis-
lation, the Committee feels that the seventh recital in
the preamble concerning the mandatory indication of
this type of treatment should be amended to read as
follows:
No C 328/28 Official Journal of the European Communities 22. 12. 86
'Whereas authorization to treat certain types of
foodstuffs with ionizing radiation has been granted
in several Member States and whereas consumers
should be informed of such treatment'.
2.2.2.1. Contrary to the Commission proposal
(Article 1 (5)), Article 6 (5) (b) of the basic Directive
should not therefore be amended.
2.2.3. In the interests of consumers and the food
industry the Committee would like to see a common
wording or means of identification for this kind of
treatment throughout the Community.
2.3. Article 1, paragraphs 7 and 23 (abolition of
the provision enabling flavourings to be indicated in
accordance with national legislation, and addition of a
'flavouring(s)' category to Annex 1)
2.3.1. The Committee is in favour of a single Com-
munity rule governing the indication of flavourings.
2.3.2. The Committee would like Article 1, para-
graph 23 to be worded more precisely. The present
wording to the effect that the designation 'flavouring'
may be supplemented by an indication of the animal
or vegetable origin of the aromatizers used would not
seem to be entirely satisfactory. Work currently being
carried out on the definition of categories of flavourings
should be taken into account in determining what
additional indications may be given to make the desig-
nation 'flavouring' more explicit.
2.4. Article 1, paragraph 10 (abolition of the obli-
gation to specify net quantities of spices and herbs of
less than five grams)
2.4.1. The Committee notes that this measure is jus-
tified by practical problems of application.
2.4.2. The Committee would like to see the possi-
bility of a threshold higher than five grams examined
at the earliest opportunity.
2.5. Article 1, paragraph 12 (abolition of the right
to permit "use before...' dates for microbiologically
highly perishable foodstuffs)
2.5.1. 'Use before' dates have been adopted by a large
majority of Member States to indicate the minimum
durability of microbiologically highly perishable food-
stuffs.
2.5.2. The 'use before' formula would seem to have
a number of advantages for consumers, the food indus-
try and the inspection authorities. From the consumer's
point of view it has the merit of greater force than the
'best before' formula and it highlights the perishability
of certain foodstuffs. It has not posed any particular
application problems for the industry and it has facili-
tated close monitoring of products that are sensitive
from the health angle. The advantage for the inspection
authorities is that the imperative nature of this method
of indicating minimum durability makes it possible to
prohibit the sale of a product once the date has been
reached.
2.5.3. If, as stated in the Explanatory Memorandum,
'use before' and 'best before' dates mean the same thing
to the consumer, one solution would be to employ only
the 'use before' formula. This might, however, have
one or two unwanted consequences, e.g.:
— there would be a tendency to extend the minimum
durability period of some products,
— it would be more difficult to sell products which
have passed the date of minimum durability but
which are still quite fit for consumption, thus lead-
ing to a high level of waste.
2.5.4. The Commission proposal, whilst having the
merit of laying down a common Community rule for
expressing the date of minimum durability, is not there-
fore entirely satisfactory on this point.
2.5.5. The Committee therefore proposes that the
possibility of employing 'use before' dates be retained
in the case of microbiologically highly perishable food-
stuffs. Parallel with this, Community provisions should
be quickly adopted laying down standard conditions for
the use of this indication (list of foodstuffs concerned —
fixing of the period) with the threefold objective of
improving consumer information as regards a, label
indication which could have health implications, of
offering greater legal certainty to the food industry and
of facilitating trade.
2.6. Article 1, paragraph 13 (abolition of the right
to permit the expression of the minimum durability of
a foodstuff otherwise than in, terms of the date of
minimum durability)
2.6.1. This Commission proposal appears justified
in the light of the above proposal that 'use before'
dates be retained for microbiologically highly perishable
foodstuffs.
22. 12. 86 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 328/29
2.7. Article 1, paragraphs 14 and 22 (drawing-up of
a single list of foodstuffs which do not require indi-
cation of the date of minimum durability)
21 A. The Committee welcomes the Commission
proposal that there be a single list of foodstuffs which
do not require indication of the date of minimum
durability. The Committee feels that this solution,
which would abolish the possibility of derogations by
individual governments, is the most favourable one
from the point of view of consumers, who are particu-
larly attentive to date markings, and also for the indus-
try, which would then have a single legal system, thus
facilitating trade.
2.7.2. There might, however, be application prob-
lems for manufacturers in those Member States which
had national derogations from the requirement to indi-
cate minimum durability dates for ice creams in general,
for foodstuffs whose minimum durability exceeds
18 months and for deep-frozen foodstuffs. Under the
new Commission proposal these foodstuffs, with the
exception of ice cream in single portions for immediate
consumption, will no longer be exempt from the
requirement to indicate the date of minimum durability.
2.7.3. The Committee feels that special deadlines
could be fixed for the application of the provision
to ice creams, foodstuffs whose minimum durability
exceeds 18 months and deep-frozen foodstuffs. These
adaptation periods could be established in the light of
specific studies, taking particular account of the practi-
cal experience of Member States which have made date
indication compulsory for these three types of product.
2.8. Article 1, paragraph 16 (right to give label par-
ticulars on the commercial documents only in the case
of foodstuffs pre-packaged and marketed at a stage
prior to their sale to the ultimate consumer)
2.8.1. The Committee wonders about the practical
implications of the Commission proposal contained in
Article 1, paragraph 16, which permits label particulars
to be given only on the commercial documents relating
to the foodstuff in question. This new possibility could,
for example, make it easier for the labelling operations
to be transferred from the manufacturing stage to the
distribution stage.
Done at Brussels, 17 September 1986.
2.8.2. It would seeem that this provision is to apply
to pre-packaged foodstuffs intended for the ultimate
consumer but which are at a stage prior to their sale
to the ultimate consumer. This poses two problems:
— the concept of ultimate consumer has not been
defined,
— what labelling rules will be applied to pre-packaged
foodstuffs intended for restaurants, hospitals, can-
teens and other similar mass caterers?
2.8.3. In theory this provision might allow pre-pack-
aged foodstuffs such as canned goods and packets of
frozen food to enter into circulation in the Community
without carrying on their packaging any of the label
particulars specified in Directive 79/112/EEC. This
could give rise to certain risks. The absence of labels
might prevent identification by the inspection authori-
ties in cases where a specific foodstuff recognizable by
its label was known to pose a health risk. Also, the
commercial documents with the label particulars might
get lost, and above all it would be difficult to link
the label particulars (the date for instance) on the
commercial documents with a given batch of non-
labelled foodstuffs.
2.8.4. The Committee feels therefore that the Com-
mission proposal contained in Article 1, paragraph 16,
does not go far enough and needs supplementing on
three points:
— detailed rules applicable to restaurants, hospitals,
canteens and similar mass caterers,
— a requirement that the commercial documents with
all the label particulars should accompany the food-
stuffs to which they relate;
— introduction of specific arrangements making it easy
for the documents with the label particulars to be
linked definitely with the pre-packaged foodstuffs
so as to enable these foodstuffs to be checked before
sale to the ultimate consumer and ensure certainty
in commercial transactions.
The Chairman
of the Economic and Social Committee
Gerd MUHR
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy