6 Amendments of Othmar KARAS related to 2018/0088(COD)
Amendment 91 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 34 a (new)
Recital 34 a (new)
(34 a) whereas the second paragraph of point (a) of Article 2(4) of the Directive 2001/110/EC on honey provides that, where honey originates from more than one Member State or third country, the mandatory indication of the countries of origin may be replaced by one of the following, as appropriate: ‘blend of EU honeys’, ‘blend of non-EU honeys’ or ‘blend of EU and non-EU honeys’; whereas the indication ‘blend of EU and non-EU honeys’ is not informative enough for the consumer;
Amendment 92 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 34 b (new)
Recital 34 b (new)
(34 b) whereas many honey packagers and traders now abuse this way of indicating origin in order to conceal the real country of origin, as well as the proportion of honey from the different countries concerned, as purchasers are becoming more knowledgeable and are distrustful of foodstuffs from certain countries;
Amendment 93 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 34 c (new)
Recital 34 c (new)
(34 c) whereas the resolution of the European Parliament at 1 March 2018 on prospects and challenges for the EU apiculture sector “considers … that labelling such as ‘blend of EU honeys’, ‘blend of non-EU honeys’, and especially ‘blend of EU and non-EU honeys’, completely conceals the origin of the honey from the consumer and consequently fails to fulfil the principles of EU consumer protection law (paragraph 58)” and, therefore, “Asks for the ‘blend of EU and non-EU honeys’ descriptor on labels to be replaced by an indication of exactly which country or countries the honey used in the final product come from, and that these be listed in the order which corresponds to the percentage proportions used in the final product … (paragraph 59)
Amendment 94 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 34 d (new)
Recital 34 d (new)
(34 d) whereas the situation on the EU internal honey market has been worsened due to the continuous import of adultered honey according to representatives of European and national beekeeper organisations; whereas the EU is not supposed to tolerate this situation anymore and it should take the right step forward which is the correction of the labelling section of the Directive 2001/110/EC on honey;
Amendment 95 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 34 e (new)
Recital 34 e (new)
(34 e) whereas current rules do not take account of fraudulent practices affecting processed products such as biscuits, breakfast cereals, confectionery, etc.; whereas the label ‘honey’ can mislead consumers in regard to the real content of the given product, as it is often used when much less than 50 % of the sugar content of the product originates from honey; whereas the food labelling rules has to be corrected also in this field;
Amendment 212 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 a (new)
Article 4 a (new)
Directive No 2001/110/EC
Article 2 – paragraph 4 – point a
Article 2 – paragraph 4 – point a
Article 4 a Amendments to Directive (EC) No 2001/110 on honey Directive (EC) No 2001/110 is amended as follows: (1) Article 2 is amended as follows: (a) Article 2, paragraph (4) point a) is replaced by the following text: “The country or countries of origin where the honey has been harvested shall be indicated on the label by which country or countries the honey used in the final product come from, and that these shall be listed in the order which corresponds to the percentage proportions used in the final product additionally stating the percentage by country in a given product.” (b) Article 2 is completed by the following paragraph (6): “The use of the word ‘honey’ or the terms ‘containing honey’ or ‘made with honey’ in the designation of processed food products, or in any graphic or non- graphic element indicating that the product contains honey may only be used if at least 50 % of the sugar- content of the product originates from honey.”