Role of the Commission in the management of food crisis

Introductions

• Carmen Garau DG Health and Consumers Directorate Safety of the food chain Unit Enforcement

• Implementation in the MS, official controls (border controls), fraud

The "agri-food chain"

– food and food safety, feed and feed safety;

– GMOs;

– animal health requirements;

– risks from animal by-products and derived products;

– welfare requirements for animals;

– protective measures against pests of plants;

– on plant reproductive material;

– placing on the market and use of plant protection

products and the sustainable use of pesticides;

– organic production and labelling of organic products.

Special powers/prerogatives of Commission

• Inspection powers (FVO)

• Emergency powers to protect health (human, animal, plant)

• Coordination of action in case of cross border problems

The actors:

• Operators (Art 17(1) Regulation (EC) NO 178/2002)

• 1. Food and feed business operators at all stages of production, processing and distribution within the businesses under their control shall ensure that foods or feeds satisfy the requirements of food law which are relevant to their activities and shall verify that such requirements are met.

The actors (2):

• Member States (Art 17(2) Regulation (EC) NO 178/2002)

• 2. Member States shall enforce food law, and monitor and verify that the relevant requirements of food law are fulfilled by food and feed business operators at all stages of production, processing and distribution.

• For that purpose, they shall maintain a system of official controls and other activities as appropriate to the circumstances, including public communication on food and feed safety and risk, food and feed safety surveillance and other monitoring activities covering all stages of production, processing and distribution.

And Regulation (EC) No 882/2004, which governs:

• Official controls (verification of compliance)

• Requirements of competent authorities (independence, impartiality, competence, resources)

• Enforcement action (action in case of non-compliance)

• Commission controls (FVO)

• Training, laboratories, etc. …

• RASFF: Rapid alert system

• 1. A rapid alert system for the notification of a direct or indirect risk

to human health deriving from food or feed is hereby established as a network. It shall involve the Member States, the Commission and the Authority. ... The Commission shall be responsible for managing the network.

• 2. Where a member of the network has any information relating to the existence of a serious direct or indirect risk to human health deriving from food or feed, this information shall be immediately notified to the Commission under the rapid alert system. The Commission shall transmit this information immediately to the members of the network.

• ….

Article 50 Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 (the RASFF):

Purpose of RASFF, role of the Commission

• Does RASFF = management of crisis?

Many mechanisms are at play in case of a food crisis

• Purpose : rapid exchange of information in cases of risk so as to enable the MS concerned to take rapid action

• Role of the Commission:

• manage the tool, facilitate the exchanges

• Bowland case: this does not exclude the possibility for the Commission to express its views (not binding in that case) in full respect of the prerogatives of the MS (T-212/06)

Purpose of administrative cooperation - Title IV of Reg. 882/04

• Purpose: cross-border enforcement of food chain rules

• MS are under obligation to cooperate:

• on request (CA needs information to verify compliance within its jurisdiction)

• without request (CA becomes aware of a non-compliance which may have implications in another MS)

• in case of non-compliance identified at destination

=> Notification to RASFF does not replace the obligation to cooperate.

Role of the Commission – Administrative Cooperation /1

• The Commission shall coordinate if it becomes aware of activities which are contrary to food chain law and are of "interest at Community level" because:

• widespread

• recurrent

• MS fail to agree on how to address non-compliance

Role of the Commission – Administrative Cooperation /2

• The Commission may

• send an inspection team

• Request increased controls and reports

• And always:

• adopt emergency measures to protect health

• also in case of "systemic failure" (Art 56 Reg 882/2004)

The horsemeat scandal, what happened?

• 8 February UK informed the Commission of the first findings - RASFF notification ("Findus"): horse DNA found in "beef" products

• 14 February FR informed of the Spanghero case

• 19 February Commission adopts a coordinated control plan (Rec. 2013/99 – legal base: Art. 53 of Reg, 882)

• So far more than 60 notifications to RASFF

The coordinated control plan

• Two sets of tests

- DNA

- PBZ

• Reports to Commission by 15/4

• Reports published on 16/4

• Co-financed by the Commission

After the coordinated control plan

• Investigations and enforcement action continues in the MS in accordance with normal rules an controls are carried out in accordance with general rules (882/2004) on the basis of risks and of the likelihood of non-compliance.

• MS are adjusting their control plans to the evidence provided by the CCP

After the coordinated control plan

• Sanctions according to national rules

• Remedial action in accordance with Article 54 of Reg. 882/2004 and national rules

Action Plan "horsemeat" /1

• Issue: is the RASFF The right tool?

• Action #1: dedicated IT tool for the rapid exchange of information

• Issue: are all the actors working together and cooperating to the full of their capacity?

• Action #2: mapping tools and mechanisms to fight fraud

• Action #3: work with Europol where appropriate

Action Plan "horsemeat" /2

• Issue how to ensure a comprehensive overview from the coordinated plan?

• Action #4: Coordinated plans will be binding

• Issue: ensure that MS adequately investigate potential fraud

• Action #5: mandatory inclusion of controls for fraud in the MANCP

Action Plan "horsemeat" /3

• Ensure dissuasive penalties

• Action #6: penalties to offset the financial gain sought through the intentional violation

Further action – review of 882/2004

• Strengthen the administrative cooperation framework in Regulation 882/2004

• Deadlines

• Clearer role of the Commission

• Empowerment to adopt implementing rules

• " to set up a mechanism for the rapid exchange of information in cases which call for coordinated action

The good news is …

• That so far, no reasons emerged for emergency measures, either by the Commission or the MS (Articles 53, 54 of Regulation (EC) No 178/2002).

Challenges ahead

• Criminal investigations Vs administrative action in case of potential risks

• How to define the obligation for the Commission to coordinate action in cases of widespread violations of food chain rules

• How to organise the rapid exchange of information in cases which have potential implications for health (the "serious risk" of Article 5O GFL) AND require cross border enforcement

Thank you!