BETA


2008/2220(INI) Ensuring food quality - Harmonisation or mutual recognition of standards

Progress: Procedure completed

RoleCommitteeRapporteurShadows
Lead AGRI PETRE Maria (icon: PPE-DE PPE-DE)
Committee Opinion ENVI CSIBI Magor Imre (icon: ALDE ALDE)
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
RoP 052, RoP 052-p4

Events

2009/10/06
   EC - Commission response to text adopted in plenary
Documents
2009/03/10
   EP - Results of vote in Parliament
2009/03/10
   EP - Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
Details

The European Parliament adopted, by 547 votes to 37 a with 49 abstentions, a resolution on ensuring food quality including harmonisation or mutual recognition of standards, in response to the Commission's Green Paper on agricultural product quality. Members support the criterion of promoting the quality of European agricultural products while not generating additional costs or burdens for producers.

They consider it vital that there should also be conditions of fair competition for imported products, which tend not to meet standards comparable to those governing Community products. The EU's quality standards applicable to third-country products having access to the internal market need to be laid down on the basis of agreement in the World Trade Organisation. The Commission must seek to secure an agreement on the ‘non-trade concerns’ which ensures that as many imported products as possible meet the same requirements as those imposed on European farmers, so that the quality of agricultural products which meet EU requirements offers agricultural producers a strong competitive advantage.

Parliament expressed concerned at the influence of the big retail chains on the general quality of European food products. It suggests that the Commission take note of the need to regulate the reverse tendering practices imposed by a small number of bulk buyers, in view of their disastrous consequences for quality products.

Production and marketing standards : Members are concerned at the complexity of the EU system of basic standards and at the multiplicity of rules which farmers have to comply with, and favour a simplified system. They also call for the development of EU guidelines on the use of general reserved terms, such as "low in sugar", and "low carbon ", in order to avoid misleading practices.

Parliament is concerned at the fact that the majority of EU consumers are not sufficiently informed concerning the food chain, especially as regards products' origins. It advocates mandatory indication of place of production of primary products based on a country of origin label. Such a system should also apply to processed food products. MEPs support the Australian model of labelling of the country of origin. They take the view that the use of the general European quality label, bearing the words ‘produced in the EU’, must ultimately ensure that European products stand out on the market, on the basis of the high quality standards governing their production. In addition, the optional reserved terms should be promoted as an alternative to compulsory marketing standards.

Specific quality systems : Parliament considers that market monitoring for the enforcement of all PDO (protected designations of origin) and PGI (protected geographical indications), provisions will increase administrative costs for Member States but will contribute to more effective protection. It favours Community technical assistance for monitoring by Member States so as to ensure that PDO and PGI protection arrangements are implemented as uniformly as possible. It advocates further action to disseminate information on these systems, with Community financial support. The Commission is asked to step up its efforts, particularly at the political level, to bring about an improvement in PGI protection in the course of the WTO talks.

Members suggest setting up a European Agency for Product Quality, which would work closely with the European Food Safety Authority and the Commission. That Agency would also adjudicate on the increasing number of requests from third countries in relation to PDO, PGI and traditional speciality guaranteed products.

On the matter of organic food, Parliament supports, in principle, the proposal for an EU organic label . It advocates the compulsory indication of country of origin in the case of fresh and processed organic products imported from third countries independently of whether they bear Community organic production certification. Members also suggests enhancing the credibility of European logo by means of a programme to promote organic products, and examining the question of dual certification required in many cases by major distributors, since this is resulting in a shortage of organic products on the EU market.

Members call on the Commission to provide criteria for quality initiatives such as voluntary GMO-free labelling schemes.

Certification systems : they take the view that EU rules on the harmonisation of standards are unnecessary, and that there is no need to introduce new certification schemes for foodstuffs at EU level, as this would undermine existing schemes and mislead consumers. The development of quality marks must not result in more red tape for producers. Producers should be able to take the initiative regarding the use of such marks, and the intervention of the Community bodies should be confined to ensuring the protection of those marks with a view to guaranteeing producers a fair price and protecting the consumer from fraud.

With regard to the international dimension, Parliament is concerned at pressure from products from emerging countries which do not meet the same quality standards and often benefit from lax controls. It reiterates the need to implement the concept of 'qualified market access' , as affirmed in numerous resolutions of Parliament.

It supports action to communicate the benefits of the EU's policies for food quality and safety, and emphasises the potential role of EU funding in this area.

Lastly, it calls for the creation of sales promotion programmes for local markets , to promote local processing and marketing initiatives. This could be done by producer cooperatives, which boost added value in rural areas and which by avoiding long transport routes set a good example for combating climate change.

Documents
2009/03/10
   EP - End of procedure in Parliament
2009/03/09
   EP - Debate in Parliament
2009/02/23
   EP - Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
Documents
2009/02/23
   EP - Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
Documents
2009/02/17
   EP - Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
Details

The Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development adopted an own-initiative report drafted by Maria PETRE (EPP-ED, RO) on ensuring food quality: harmonisation or mutual recognition of standards, in response to the Commission's Green Paper on agricultural product quality: product standards, farming requirements and quality schemes. Members welcome the reflection process launched by the Green Paper, and support the criterion of promoting the quality of European agricultural products while not generating additional costs or burdens for producers.

They consider it vital that there should also be conditions of fair competition for imported products , which tend not to meet standards comparable to those governing Community products. The EU's quality standards applicable to third-country products having access to the internal market need to be laid down on the basis of agreement in the World Trade Organisation (WTO). The Commission must seek to secure an agreement on the ‘non-trade concerns’ which ensures that as many imported products as possible meet the same requirements as those imposed on European farmers, so that the quality of agricultural products which meet EU requirements offers agricultural producers a strong competitive advantage.

The committee expressed concerned at the influence of the big retail chains on the general quality level of European food products. It suggests to the Commission the need to regulate the reverse tendering practices imposed by a small number of large European buyers, in view of their disastrous consequences for quality products.

Production and marketing standards : Members are concerned at the complexity of the European system of basic standards. The report calls for further simplification of marketing standards by clarifying the main criteria to be applied, and for the development of EU guidelines on the use of general reserved terms, such as “low in sugar”, "low carbon", “dietary” and "natural", in order to avoid misleading practices.

It advocates mandatory indication of place of production of primary products based on a country of origin label, reflecting consumer desire to know more about the origins of the product they are buying. Such a system should also apply to processed food products. MEPs support the Australian model of labelling of the country of origin. They take the view that the use of the general European quality label, bearing the words ‘produced in the EU’, must ultimately ensure that European products stand out on the market, on the basis of the high quality standards governing their production. In addition, the optional reserved terms should be promoted as an alternative to compulsory marketing standards.

Specific quality systems in the EU : with regard to PGIs (protected geographical indications), PDOs (protected designations of origin) and GTSs (guaranteed traditional specialities), the report proposes Community technical assistance for the implementation of the systems in the Member States. It advocates further action to disseminate information on these systems, with Community financial support, both within the internal market and in third countries. The Commission is asked to step up its efforts, particularly at the political level, to bring about an improvement in PGI protection in the course of the WTO talks.

Members suggest setting up a European Agency for Product Quality , which would work closely with the European Food Safety Authority and the Commission. That Agency would also adjudicate on the increasing number of requests from third countries in relation to PDO, PGI and traditional speciality guaranteed products.

On the matter of organic food, the committee supports, in principle, the proposal for an EU organic label. It advocates the compulsory indication of country of origin in the case of fresh and processed organic products imported from third countries independently of whether they bear Community organic production certification. The report also suggests enhancing the credibility of European logo by means of a programme to promote organic products; and examining the question of dual certification required in many cases by major distributors, since this is resulting in a shortage of organic products on the EU market.

Members call on the Commission to provide criteria for quality initiatives such as voluntary GMO-free labelling schemes.

Certification systems : Members take the view that EU rules on the harmonisation of standards are unnecessary, and that there is no need to introduce new certification schemes for foodstuffs at EU level, as this would undermine existing schemes and mislead consumers. The development of quality marks must not result in more red tape for producers. Producers should be able to take the initiative regarding the use of such marks, and the intervention of the Community bodies should be confined to ensuring the protection of those marks with a view to guaranteeing producers a fair price for their efforts and protecting the consumer from fraud.

With regard to the international dimension, the committee notes the existence of a number of problems relating to competitiveness vis-à-vis the Union's main trading partners. It is concerned at pressure from products from emerging countries which do not meet the same quality standards and often benefit from lax controls. It reiterates the need to implement the concept of 'qualified market access' , as affirmed in numerous resolutions of Parliament.

The report supports action to communicate the benefits of the EU's policies for food quality and safety, and emphasises the potential role of EU funding in this area.

Lastly, the report calls for the creation of sales promotion programmes for local markets , to promote local processing and marketing initiatives. This could be done by producer cooperatives, which boost added value in rural areas.

2009/02/11
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2009/01/30
   EP - Amendments tabled in committee
Documents
2008/12/18
   EP - Committee draft report
Documents
2008/10/07
   EP - CSIBI Magor Imre (ALDE) appointed as rapporteur in ENVI
2008/09/23
   EP - Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
2008/09/23
   EP - Referral to associated committees announced in Parliament
2008/06/24
   EP - PETRE Maria (PPE-DE) appointed as rapporteur in AGRI

Documents

Votes

Rapport PETRE A6-0088/2009 - résolution

2009/03/10 Outcome: +: 547, 0: 49, -: 37
DE FR IT ES PL GB RO BE HU AT NL EL BG PT FI SK LT IE SI EE LU LV CY MT SE DK CZ
Total
87
60
61
40
38
61
31
22
19
17
22
19
14
18
13
12
10
9
7
6
5
4
6
3
17
14
18
icon: PPE-DE PPE-DE
239

Lithuania PPE-DE

1

Estonia PPE-DE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg PPE-DE

3

Latvia PPE-DE

For (1)

1

Malta PPE-DE

2

Denmark PPE-DE

1
icon: PSE PSE
177

Lithuania PSE

2

Slovenia PSE

For (1)

1

Estonia PSE

3

Luxembourg PSE

For (1)

1

Malta PSE

For (1)

1

Czechia PSE

For (1)

1
icon: ALDE ALDE
89

Spain ALDE

1
2

Austria ALDE

1

Ireland ALDE

For (1)

1

Slovenia ALDE

2

Estonia ALDE

2

Latvia ALDE

1

Cyprus ALDE

For (1)

1

Sweden ALDE

Abstain (2)

2

Denmark ALDE

Abstain (1)

4
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
37

Italy Verts/ALE

2

Spain Verts/ALE

Against (1)

2

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

4

Belgium Verts/ALE

2

Austria Verts/ALE

2

Netherlands Verts/ALE

Abstain (1)

2

Finland Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Latvia Verts/ALE

1

Sweden Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Denmark Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1
icon: UEN UEN
28

Lithuania UEN

1

Latvia UEN

For (1)

1

Denmark UEN

For (1)

1
icon: NI NI
23

Italy NI

2

Poland NI

1

United Kingdom NI

For (1)

5

Belgium NI

3

Austria NI

2

Bulgaria NI

For (1)

1

Czechia NI

Against (1)

1
icon: IND/DEM IND/DEM
12

United Kingdom IND/DEM

4

Netherlands IND/DEM

2

Sweden IND/DEM

2

Denmark IND/DEM

Against (1)

1
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
28

France GUE/NGL

2

Netherlands GUE/NGL

Abstain (1)

1

Greece GUE/NGL

2

Portugal GUE/NGL

2

Cyprus GUE/NGL

2

Sweden GUE/NGL

2

Denmark GUE/NGL

1
AmendmentsDossier
151 2008/2220(INI)
2009/01/22 ENVI 10 amendments...
source: PE-418.336
2009/01/26 ENVI 6 amendments...
source: PE-418.395
2009/01/30 AGRI 135 amendments...
source: PE-419.848

History

(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)

committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
True
committee_full
Agriculture and Rural Development
committee
AGRI
rapporteur
name: PETRE Maria date: 2008-06-24T00:00:00 group: European People's Party (Christian Democrats) and European Democrats abbr: PPE-DE
committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
True
committee_full
Agriculture and Rural Development
committee
AGRI
date
2008-06-24T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: PETRE Maria group: European People's Party (Christian Democrats) and European Democrats abbr: PPE-DE
committees/1
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
True
committee_full
Environment, Public Health and Food Safety
committee
ENVI
rapporteur
name: CSIBI Magor Imre date: 2008-10-07T00:00:00 group: Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe abbr: ALDE
committees/1
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
True
committee_full
Environment, Public Health and Food Safety
committee
ENVI
date
2008-10-07T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: CSIBI Magor Imre group: Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe abbr: ALDE
docs/3/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A6-2009-88&language=EN
New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-6-2009-0088_EN.html
docs/4/body
EC
events/3/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A6-2009-88&language=EN
New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-6-2009-0088_EN.html
events/6/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P6-TA-2009-98
New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-6-2009-0098_EN.html
activities
  • date: 2008-09-23T00:00:00 body: EP type: Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP responsible: True committee: AGRI date: 2008-06-24T00:00:00 committee_full: Agriculture and Rural Development (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: PPE-DE name: PETRE Maria body: EP responsible: False committee: ENVI date: 2008-10-07T00:00:00 committee_full: Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: ALDE name: CSIBI Magor Imre
  • date: 2009-02-17T00:00:00 body: EP committees: body: EP responsible: True committee: AGRI date: 2008-06-24T00:00:00 committee_full: Agriculture and Rural Development (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: PPE-DE name: PETRE Maria body: EP responsible: False committee: ENVI date: 2008-10-07T00:00:00 committee_full: Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: ALDE name: CSIBI Magor Imre type: Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
  • date: 2009-02-23T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A6-2009-88&language=EN type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading title: A6-0088/2009 body: EP type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
  • date: 2009-03-09T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20090309&type=CRE type: Debate in Parliament title: Debate in Parliament body: EP type: Debate in Parliament
  • date: 2009-03-10T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/sda.do?id=16798&l=en type: Results of vote in Parliament title: Results of vote in Parliament url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P6-TA-2009-98 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading title: T6-0098/2009 body: EP type: Results of vote in Parliament
commission
  • body: EC dg: Agriculture and Rural Development commissioner: FISCHER BOEL Mariann
committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
True
committee_full
Agriculture and Rural Development
committee
AGRI
date
2008-06-24T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: PETRE Maria group: European People's Party (Christian Democrats) and European Democrats abbr: PPE-DE
committees/0
body
EP
responsible
True
committee
AGRI
date
2008-06-24T00:00:00
committee_full
Agriculture and Rural Development (Associated committee)
rapporteur
group: PPE-DE name: PETRE Maria
committees/1
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
True
committee_full
Environment, Public Health and Food Safety
committee
ENVI
date
2008-10-07T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: CSIBI Magor Imre group: Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe abbr: ALDE
committees/1
body
EP
responsible
False
committee
ENVI
date
2008-10-07T00:00:00
committee_full
Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (Associated committee)
rapporteur
group: ALDE name: CSIBI Magor Imre
docs
  • date: 2008-12-18T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE414.335 title: PE414.335 type: Committee draft report body: EP
  • date: 2009-01-30T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE419.848 title: PE419.848 type: Amendments tabled in committee body: EP
  • date: 2009-02-11T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE418.128&secondRef=02 title: PE418.128 committee: ENVI type: Committee opinion body: EP
  • date: 2009-02-23T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A6-2009-88&language=EN title: A6-0088/2009 type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading body: EP
  • date: 2009-10-06T00:00:00 docs: url: /oeil/spdoc.do?i=16798&j=0&l=en title: SP(2009)3244 type: Commission response to text adopted in plenary
events
  • date: 2008-09-23T00:00:00 type: Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading body: EP
  • date: 2008-09-23T00:00:00 type: Referral to associated committees announced in Parliament body: EP
  • date: 2009-02-17T00:00:00 type: Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading body: EP summary: The Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development adopted an own-initiative report drafted by Maria PETRE (EPP-ED, RO) on ensuring food quality: harmonisation or mutual recognition of standards, in response to the Commission's Green Paper on agricultural product quality: product standards, farming requirements and quality schemes. Members welcome the reflection process launched by the Green Paper, and support the criterion of promoting the quality of European agricultural products while not generating additional costs or burdens for producers. They consider it vital that there should also be conditions of fair competition for imported products , which tend not to meet standards comparable to those governing Community products. The EU's quality standards applicable to third-country products having access to the internal market need to be laid down on the basis of agreement in the World Trade Organisation (WTO). The Commission must seek to secure an agreement on the ‘non-trade concerns’ which ensures that as many imported products as possible meet the same requirements as those imposed on European farmers, so that the quality of agricultural products which meet EU requirements offers agricultural producers a strong competitive advantage. The committee expressed concerned at the influence of the big retail chains on the general quality level of European food products. It suggests to the Commission the need to regulate the reverse tendering practices imposed by a small number of large European buyers, in view of their disastrous consequences for quality products. Production and marketing standards : Members are concerned at the complexity of the European system of basic standards. The report calls for further simplification of marketing standards by clarifying the main criteria to be applied, and for the development of EU guidelines on the use of general reserved terms, such as “low in sugar”, "low carbon", “dietary” and "natural", in order to avoid misleading practices. It advocates mandatory indication of place of production of primary products based on a country of origin label, reflecting consumer desire to know more about the origins of the product they are buying. Such a system should also apply to processed food products. MEPs support the Australian model of labelling of the country of origin. They take the view that the use of the general European quality label, bearing the words ‘produced in the EU’, must ultimately ensure that European products stand out on the market, on the basis of the high quality standards governing their production. In addition, the optional reserved terms should be promoted as an alternative to compulsory marketing standards. Specific quality systems in the EU : with regard to PGIs (protected geographical indications), PDOs (protected designations of origin) and GTSs (guaranteed traditional specialities), the report proposes Community technical assistance for the implementation of the systems in the Member States. It advocates further action to disseminate information on these systems, with Community financial support, both within the internal market and in third countries. The Commission is asked to step up its efforts, particularly at the political level, to bring about an improvement in PGI protection in the course of the WTO talks. Members suggest setting up a European Agency for Product Quality , which would work closely with the European Food Safety Authority and the Commission. That Agency would also adjudicate on the increasing number of requests from third countries in relation to PDO, PGI and traditional speciality guaranteed products. On the matter of organic food, the committee supports, in principle, the proposal for an EU organic label. It advocates the compulsory indication of country of origin in the case of fresh and processed organic products imported from third countries independently of whether they bear Community organic production certification. The report also suggests enhancing the credibility of European logo by means of a programme to promote organic products; and examining the question of dual certification required in many cases by major distributors, since this is resulting in a shortage of organic products on the EU market. Members call on the Commission to provide criteria for quality initiatives such as voluntary GMO-free labelling schemes. Certification systems : Members take the view that EU rules on the harmonisation of standards are unnecessary, and that there is no need to introduce new certification schemes for foodstuffs at EU level, as this would undermine existing schemes and mislead consumers. The development of quality marks must not result in more red tape for producers. Producers should be able to take the initiative regarding the use of such marks, and the intervention of the Community bodies should be confined to ensuring the protection of those marks with a view to guaranteeing producers a fair price for their efforts and protecting the consumer from fraud. With regard to the international dimension, the committee notes the existence of a number of problems relating to competitiveness vis-à-vis the Union's main trading partners. It is concerned at pressure from products from emerging countries which do not meet the same quality standards and often benefit from lax controls. It reiterates the need to implement the concept of 'qualified market access' , as affirmed in numerous resolutions of Parliament. The report supports action to communicate the benefits of the EU's policies for food quality and safety, and emphasises the potential role of EU funding in this area. Lastly, the report calls for the creation of sales promotion programmes for local markets , to promote local processing and marketing initiatives. This could be done by producer cooperatives, which boost added value in rural areas.
  • date: 2009-02-23T00:00:00 type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A6-2009-88&language=EN title: A6-0088/2009
  • date: 2009-03-09T00:00:00 type: Debate in Parliament body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20090309&type=CRE title: Debate in Parliament
  • date: 2009-03-10T00:00:00 type: Results of vote in Parliament body: EP docs: url: https://oeil.secure.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/sda.do?id=16798&l=en title: Results of vote in Parliament
  • date: 2009-03-10T00:00:00 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P6-TA-2009-98 title: T6-0098/2009 summary: The European Parliament adopted, by 547 votes to 37 a with 49 abstentions, a resolution on ensuring food quality including harmonisation or mutual recognition of standards, in response to the Commission's Green Paper on agricultural product quality. Members support the criterion of promoting the quality of European agricultural products while not generating additional costs or burdens for producers. They consider it vital that there should also be conditions of fair competition for imported products, which tend not to meet standards comparable to those governing Community products. The EU's quality standards applicable to third-country products having access to the internal market need to be laid down on the basis of agreement in the World Trade Organisation. The Commission must seek to secure an agreement on the ‘non-trade concerns’ which ensures that as many imported products as possible meet the same requirements as those imposed on European farmers, so that the quality of agricultural products which meet EU requirements offers agricultural producers a strong competitive advantage. Parliament expressed concerned at the influence of the big retail chains on the general quality of European food products. It suggests that the Commission take note of the need to regulate the reverse tendering practices imposed by a small number of bulk buyers, in view of their disastrous consequences for quality products. Production and marketing standards : Members are concerned at the complexity of the EU system of basic standards and at the multiplicity of rules which farmers have to comply with, and favour a simplified system. They also call for the development of EU guidelines on the use of general reserved terms, such as "low in sugar", and "low carbon ", in order to avoid misleading practices. Parliament is concerned at the fact that the majority of EU consumers are not sufficiently informed concerning the food chain, especially as regards products' origins. It advocates mandatory indication of place of production of primary products based on a country of origin label. Such a system should also apply to processed food products. MEPs support the Australian model of labelling of the country of origin. They take the view that the use of the general European quality label, bearing the words ‘produced in the EU’, must ultimately ensure that European products stand out on the market, on the basis of the high quality standards governing their production. In addition, the optional reserved terms should be promoted as an alternative to compulsory marketing standards. Specific quality systems : Parliament considers that market monitoring for the enforcement of all PDO (protected designations of origin) and PGI (protected geographical indications), provisions will increase administrative costs for Member States but will contribute to more effective protection. It favours Community technical assistance for monitoring by Member States so as to ensure that PDO and PGI protection arrangements are implemented as uniformly as possible. It advocates further action to disseminate information on these systems, with Community financial support. The Commission is asked to step up its efforts, particularly at the political level, to bring about an improvement in PGI protection in the course of the WTO talks. Members suggest setting up a European Agency for Product Quality, which would work closely with the European Food Safety Authority and the Commission. That Agency would also adjudicate on the increasing number of requests from third countries in relation to PDO, PGI and traditional speciality guaranteed products. On the matter of organic food, Parliament supports, in principle, the proposal for an EU organic label . It advocates the compulsory indication of country of origin in the case of fresh and processed organic products imported from third countries independently of whether they bear Community organic production certification. Members also suggests enhancing the credibility of European logo by means of a programme to promote organic products, and examining the question of dual certification required in many cases by major distributors, since this is resulting in a shortage of organic products on the EU market. Members call on the Commission to provide criteria for quality initiatives such as voluntary GMO-free labelling schemes. Certification systems : they take the view that EU rules on the harmonisation of standards are unnecessary, and that there is no need to introduce new certification schemes for foodstuffs at EU level, as this would undermine existing schemes and mislead consumers. The development of quality marks must not result in more red tape for producers. Producers should be able to take the initiative regarding the use of such marks, and the intervention of the Community bodies should be confined to ensuring the protection of those marks with a view to guaranteeing producers a fair price and protecting the consumer from fraud. With regard to the international dimension, Parliament is concerned at pressure from products from emerging countries which do not meet the same quality standards and often benefit from lax controls. It reiterates the need to implement the concept of 'qualified market access' , as affirmed in numerous resolutions of Parliament. It supports action to communicate the benefits of the EU's policies for food quality and safety, and emphasises the potential role of EU funding in this area. Lastly, it calls for the creation of sales promotion programmes for local markets , to promote local processing and marketing initiatives. This could be done by producer cooperatives, which boost added value in rural areas and which by avoiding long transport routes set a good example for combating climate change.
  • date: 2009-03-10T00:00:00 type: End of procedure in Parliament body: EP
links
other
  • body: EC dg: url: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/agriculture/ title: Agriculture and Rural Development commissioner: FISCHER BOEL Mariann
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee
Old
AGRI/6/66705
New
  • AGRI/6/66705
procedure/legal_basis/0
Rules of Procedure EP 052
procedure/legal_basis/0
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 052
procedure/legal_basis/1
Rules of Procedure EP 052-p4
procedure/legal_basis/1
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 052-p2
procedure/subject
Old
  • 3.10.10 Foodstuffs, foodstuffs legislation
  • 4.60.04.04 Food safety
New
3.10.10
Foodstuffs, foodstuffs legislation
4.60.04.04
Food safety
activities
  • date: 2008-09-23T00:00:00 body: EP type: Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP responsible: True committee: AGRI date: 2008-06-24T00:00:00 committee_full: Agriculture and Rural Development (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: PPE-DE name: PETRE Maria body: EP responsible: False committee: ENVI date: 2008-10-07T00:00:00 committee_full: Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: ALDE name: CSIBI Magor Imre
  • date: 2009-02-17T00:00:00 body: EP committees: body: EP responsible: True committee: AGRI date: 2008-06-24T00:00:00 committee_full: Agriculture and Rural Development (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: PPE-DE name: PETRE Maria body: EP responsible: False committee: ENVI date: 2008-10-07T00:00:00 committee_full: Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: ALDE name: CSIBI Magor Imre type: Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
  • date: 2009-02-23T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A6-2009-88&language=EN type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading title: A6-0088/2009 body: EP type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
  • date: 2009-03-09T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20090309&type=CRE type: Debate in Parliament title: Debate in Parliament body: EP type: Debate in Parliament
  • date: 2009-03-10T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/sda.do?id=16798&l=en type: Results of vote in Parliament title: Results of vote in Parliament url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P6-TA-2009-98 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading title: T6-0098/2009 body: EP type: Results of vote in Parliament
committees
  • body: EP responsible: True committee: AGRI date: 2008-06-24T00:00:00 committee_full: Agriculture and Rural Development (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: PPE-DE name: PETRE Maria
  • body: EP responsible: False committee: ENVI date: 2008-10-07T00:00:00 committee_full: Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: ALDE name: CSIBI Magor Imre
links
other
  • body: EC dg: url: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/agriculture/ title: Agriculture and Rural Development commissioner: FISCHER BOEL Mariann
procedure
dossier_of_the_committee
AGRI/6/66705
reference
2008/2220(INI)
title
Ensuring food quality - Harmonisation or mutual recognition of standards
legal_basis
stage_reached
Procedure completed
subtype
Initiative
type
INI - Own-initiative procedure
subject