Codex Alimentarius Commission Tom Heilandt Codex Secretariat

of 33 /33
Workshop on the relationship between the SPS Committee and the international standard-setting organizations Codex Alimentarius Commission Tom Heilandt Codex Secretariat

Embed Size (px)

description

Workshop on the relationship between the SPS Committee and the international standard-setting organizations. Codex Alimentarius Commission Tom Heilandt Codex Secretariat. Codex mandate, membership and results. Mandate. Protect the health of consumers - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Transcript of Codex Alimentarius Commission Tom Heilandt Codex Secretariat

  • Workshop on the relationship between the SPS Committee and the international standard-setting organizations

    Codex Alimentarius CommissionTom HeilandtCodex Secretariat

  • Codex mandate, membership and results

  • MandateProtect the health of consumersEnsure fair practices in the food tradePromote coordination of all food standards work undertaken by IGOs and INGOsDevelop and maintain a collection of international food standards: the Codex Alimentarius

  • Codex offers a forum to negotiate standards

    182 members, one member organization (EC)200 IGOs and NGOs

  • 99% of the worlds population33247+149231711

  • Codex resultsHorizontal standards (GSFA, GSCTF, labelling, methods)Product standards (individual and group)Guidelines (principles, certification, inspection, risk analysis, sampling)Codes of practice (hygiene, prevention of contamination)Pesticide MRLsVeterinary drugs MRLsRegional standards, codes and guidelines

  • The SPS agreementdefines International standards, guidelines and recommendations:

    for food safety, the standards, guidelines and recommendations established by the Codex Alimentarius Commission relating to food additives, veterinary drug and pesticide residues, contaminants, methods of analysis and sampling, and codes and guidelines of hygienic practice; (Annex A,3.a))

  • Stucture,standard setting, role of science

  • Aditivos Alimentarios (China)Contaminantes de los Alimentos (Pases Bajos)Higiene de los Alimentos (Estados Unidos)Food Labelling(Canada)Residuos de Plaguicidas (China)Residuos de Medicamentos Veterinarios en los Alimentos (Estados Unidos)Horizontal CommitteesVertical CommitteesMilk and Milk Products (New Zealand)Processed Fruits and Vegetables (United States)Meat Hygiene(New Zealand)Fish and Fishery Products (Norway)Fresh Fruits and Vegetables (Mexico)Fats and Oils(Malaysia)Cereals, Pulses and Legumes (United States)Vegetable Proteins(Canada)Natural Mineral Waters(Switzerland)Cocoa Products and Chocolate (Switzerland)Ad-hoc intergovernmental task forcesFoods derived from Biotechnology (Japan)Antimicrobial Resistance (Republic of Korea)Processing and Handling of Quick Frozen Foods (Thailand)FAO/WHO Coordinating CommitteesAfrica(Ghana)Asia(Indonesia)Europe(Poland)Latin America and the Caribbean (Mexico)Near East (Tunisia)North America and South West Pacific(Tonga)Executive Committee SecretariatCodex Alimentarius CommissionImport and Export Inspection and Certification Systems (Australia)Sugars(United Kingdom)activeadjourned sine dieFruit Juices (Brazil)Animal Feeding (Denmark)dissolvedactiveGeneral Principles (France)Food Additives (China)Contaminants in Foods (Netherlands)Food Hygiene(United States)Pesticide Residues(China)Residues of Veterinary Drugs in Foods(United States)Nutrition and Foods for Special Dietary Uses (Germany)Methods of Analysis and Sampling (Hungary)

  • Discussion paperStartCriticalreview Elaboration/Negotiation/consultationAdoption/decisionT 1T 5T 8Proposed draft standardProjectdocumentT2elaborationT3consultationT4negotiationDraft standardT6consultationT7negotiationCodex standardExecutive CommitteeCommitteeCommissionT 5Endorsement bygeneral committeesT 8T 1Committeeconsultationconsultationconsultation

  • Implementation of standards and monitoringFAO/WHO capacity building programmesAcceptance procedure eliminated 2005FAO/WHO Coordinating Committees review use/non-use of Codex Standards based on replies from members of the region.

  • Role of scienceThe food standards, guidelines and other recommendations of Codex Alimentarius shall be based on the principle of sound scientific analysis and evidence, involving a thorough review of all relevant information, in order that the standards assure the quality and safety of the food supply. (CAC decision 1995)Since 1995 Risk Analysis has been implemented in Codex process will be completed in 2010

  • JECFAAd hoc consultationsJMPRbiotechnologyJEMRAbiotoxinsactive chlorineetc..Chemical hazards

    Microbiological hazardsNutritionRisk Assessment for Codex FAO/WHO scientific adviceCCFACCCFCCRVDFCCPRCCFHCCNFSDUTFFBTCCFHCCCF

  • Relationship withthe SPS committee andOIE and IPPC

  • Codex - SPSMutual reporting and participation of secretariats in meetings and workshopsCooperation on SPS training activities and in STDFContacts between SPS/CAC chairs have led to a new food additive maximum valueMonitoring of application of standards (WTO members are encouraged to notify)

  • Codex - OIEMutual participation at all different levelsParticipation of OIE in the work of Codex and reporting encouraged by the Commission (ALINORM 05/28/3, paras 97-98)OIE initiative to evaluate in CCGP the possibility of joint standards

  • Codex - IPPCCodex risk analysis texts served as model for IPPCRegular consultations between the Secretariats of the Codex Alimentarius CommissionMutual participation in meetings

  • Challenges, Possible common topics

  • ChallengesSpeed of standard development while remaining inclusive and transparentFinding consensus in a heterogeneous membershipParticipation of developing countriesPrivate standards

  • Is Codex slow? From 1 to The Codex procedure allows to create a standard in one yearFor many standards steps 6 and 7 are omitted and the majority of work is completed in 2 - 4 yearsFew standards move slowly but eventually get adopted (e.g. definition for fibre, oranges, risk analysis for governments) 5 10 yearsVery few dont move but also no consensus on stopping work > 10 yearsSome are held at step 8

  • Speed in recent yearsNew work 2008: 19 2009: 1 at 5/8; 1 at 5New work 2007: 122008: 4 at 5/8, 1 at 52009: 1 at 8, 1 at 5New work 2006: 132007: 1 at 5/8, 3 at 52008: 3 at 5/8, 3 at 8, 3 at 52009: 1 at 5/8, 2 at 8New work 2005: 112006: 2 at 5/8, 2 at 5, 1 disc2007: 1 at 5/8, 2 at 52008: 2 at 82009: 1 disc

  • Standards management - improvementsJoint Evaluation resulting in Critical Reviewfunction of CCEXECRecently Executive Committee developed guidance for:Monitoring the standards setting processApplication of the Criteria for the Establishment of Work Priorities

  • ConsensusCodex today works mainly by consensusBuilding consensus can take timeSome votes in the past have been divisiveIt is the chairpersons responsibility to facilitate consensus and to rule when it has been reachedConsensus in Codex does not have to be unanimity but there is no definitionThere is a common understanding but some concern that the concept is not applied equally across Committees

  • CAC32 on consensusBrochure for Chairs on how to apply the concept of consensus uniformlyUse of a facilitatorSatisfaction survey (including question on chairperson)Problematic issues to be brought to the CCEXEC and the informal meeting of chairs for appropriate action Convening an informal meeting of chairs Explore possibilities for developing a reference document for delegates on consensus building

  • Participation

  • Host governments + co-hosting142+3121+21+1121111121+1111+21221121

  • Proposals discussed at CAC32

    Make best use of written commentsFoster dynamic exchange outside physical meetingsReduce the number of sessionsConcentrate all Codex sessions in Rome or Geneva

  • CAC32 - ConclusionsStrengthening of the Trust FundFAO and WHO capacity building activities in developing countries, including regional workshops and STDF projectsCo-hosting of Codex sessions should be continuedMentoring mechanisms through intra-regional cooperationTimely distribution of documents in the official languages.

  • Private standards: consultants opinionsCodex has had an implicit role in guiding the development of private standards setting out a framework and common vocabularySimilar to national regulations, private standards translate Codex texts into standards containing guidance for application and auditingCodex should increase speed of standard settingCodex clientele has changed. To remain relevant, Codex depends on the adoption of its standards, guidelines and codes by both governments and private standard setters(The Impacts of Private Food Safety Standards on the Food Chain and on Public Standard-Setting Processes (ALINORM 09/32/9D-Part II) Spencer Henson and John Humphrey) )

  • CAC32 on private standards

    Concern to many members as compliance/ certification was difficult, especially for developing countries. Need to see how private standards relate to Codex standards. Codex standards should be benchmarks for these private standards. International harmonization of food safety provisions should be based on Codex standards. Forum to address the legal implications of private standards is the WTO SPS committee. CAC will work with OIE and IPPC should consult on a common strategic position on this matter Study to analyse the role, cost and benefits of private standards especially with respect to the impact on developing countries

  • Thank you

    **