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• Ensure fair practices in the food trade• Promote coordination of all food standards work

undertaken by IGOs and INGOs• Develop 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’ population

33

247+1

49

23

17

11

Codex results

• Horizontal 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 MRLs• Veterinary drugs MRLs• Regional standards, codes and guidelines

The SPS agreement

defines 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 (Países

Bajos)Higiene de los

Alimentos

(Estados Unidos)

Food Labelling

(Canada)

Residuos de Plaguicidas

(China)

Residuos de Medicamentos

Veterinarios en los Alimentos

(Estados Unidos)

Horizontal Committees Vertical Committees

Milk 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 forces

Foods derived from Biotechnology (Japan)

Antimicrobial Resistance (Republic of Korea)

Processing and Handling of Quick Frozen Foods

(Thailand)

FAO/WHO Coordinating Committees

Africa

(Ghana)

Asia

(Indonesia)

Europe

(Poland)

Latin America and the Caribbean (Mexico)

Near East (Tunisia)

North America and South West Pacific

(Tonga)

Executive Committee Secretariat

Codex Alimentarius Commission

Import and Export Inspection and

Certification Systems (Australia)

Sugars

(United Kingdom)

active

adjourned sine die

Fruit Juices (Brazil) Animal Feeding (Denmark)

dissolved

activeGeneral 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 paper

Start Criticalreview

Elaboration/Negotiation/consultation

Adoption/decision

T 1

T 5

T 8

Proposed draft standard

Projectdocument

T2elaboration

T3consultation

T4negotiation

Draft standard T6consultation

T7negotiation

Codex standardExecutive

Committee CommitteeCommission

T 5 Endorsement bygeneral committees

T 8

T 1

Committee

consultation

consultation

consultation

Implementation of standards and monitoring

• FAO/WHO capacity building programmes• Acceptance procedure eliminated 2005• FAO/WHO Coordinating Committees review

use/non-use of Codex Standards based on replies from members of the region.

Role of science

• The 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

JECFA

Ad hoc consultations

JMPR

biotechnology

JEMRA

biotoxins active chlorine

etc..

Chemical hazards Microbiological hazards

Nutrition

Risk Assessment for Codex FAO/WHO scientific advice

CCFACCCFCCRVDF

CCPR CCFH CCNFSDU

TFFBTCCFHCCCF

Relationship withthe SPS committee andOIE and IPPC

Codex - SPS

• Mutual reporting and participation of secretariats in meetings and workshops

• Cooperation on SPS training activities and in STDF

• Contacts between SPS/CAC chairs have led to a new food additive maximum value

• Monitoring of application of standards (WTO members are encouraged to notify)

Codex - OIE

• Mutual participation at all different levels• Participation 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 - IPPC

• Codex risk analysis texts served as model for IPPC

• Regular consultations between the Secretariats of the Codex Alimentarius Commission

• Mutual participation in meetings

Challenges, Possible common topics

Challenges

• Speed of standard development while remaining inclusive and transparent

• Finding consensus in a heterogeneous membership

• Participation of developing countries• Private standards

Is Codex slow? From 1 to ∞• The Codex procedure allows to create a standard

in one year• For many standards steps 6 and 7 are omitted and

the majority of work is completed in 2 - 4 years• Few standards move slowly but eventually get

adopted (e.g. definition for fibre, oranges, risk analysis for governments) 5 – 10 years

• Very few don’t move but also no consensus on stopping work > 10 years

• Some are held at step 8

Speed in recent years• New work 2008: 19

– 2009: 1 at 5/8; 1 at 5

• New work 2007: 12– 2008: 4 at 5/8, 1 at 5

– 2009: 1 at 8, 1 at 5

• New work 2006: 13– 2007: 1 at 5/8, 3 at 5

– 2008: 3 at 5/8, 3 at 8, 3 at 5

– 2009: 1 at 5/8, 2 at 8

• New work 2005: 11– 2006: 2 at 5/8, 2 at 5, 1 disc– 2007: 1 at 5/8, 2 at 5– 2008: 2 at 8– 2009: 1 disc

Standards management - improvements

• Joint Evaluation resulting in Critical Review function of CCEXEC

• Recently Executive Committee developed guidance for:– Monitoring the standards setting process– Application of the Criteria for the

Establishment of Work Priorities

Consensus• Codex today works mainly by consensus• Building consensus can take time• Some votes in the past have been divisive• It is the chairpersons responsibility to facilitate

consensus and to rule when it has been reached• Consensus in Codex does not have to be

unanimity but there is no definition• There is a common understanding but some

concern that the concept is not applied equally across Committees

CAC32 on consensus

• Brochure for Chairs on how to apply the concept of consensus uniformly

• Use of a facilitator• Satisfaction 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-hosting

1

4 2+3

1

2

1+2

1+1

1

211

1 11

2

1+1

11

1+2

1

2

2

1

1

2

1

Proposals discussed at CAC32

• Make best use of written comments

• Foster dynamic exchange outside physical meetings

• Reduce the number of sessions

• Concentrate all Codex sessions in Rome or Geneva

CAC32 - Conclusions• Strengthening of the Trust Fund• FAO and WHO capacity building activities in

developing countries, including regional workshops and STDF projects

• Co-hosting of Codex sessions should be continued

• Mentoring mechanisms through intra-regional cooperation

• Timely distribution of documents in the official languages.

Private standards: consultants’ opinions

• Codex has had an implicit role in guiding the development of private standards setting out a framework and common vocabulary

• Similar to national regulations, private standards translate Codex texts into standards containing guidance for application and auditing

• Codex should increase speed of standard setting• Codex 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