MEPs Raise Objection to Commission Proposal on Health Claims
ENVI committee members raised the objection based on concerns that the approach being taken to the substantiation of Article 13.1 claims is pharmaceutical in nature, ignoring the fact that nutrients are foods rather than drugs. The European Commission has submitted a draft list of approved claims to the Parliament for scrutiny. If the Parliament does not exercise its right to block the list by 27 April 2012, it will be deemed approved and published mid/end May 2012.
Feb 13 2012 --- Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) have raised an objection to the European Commission’s proposal for an approved list of Article 13.1 claims asking for more consideration of what should be included in the list.
The ENVI committee members Sirpa Pietikäinen (Finnish, centre right MEP), Chris Davies (UK, liberal MEP) and Pavel Poc (Czech, socialist MEP) raised the objection based on concerns that the approach being taken to the substantiation of Article 13.1 claims is pharmaceutical in nature, ignoring the fact that nutrients are foods rather than drugs.
The European Commission has submitted a draft list of approved claims to the Parliament for scrutiny. If the Parliament does not exercise its right to block the list by 27 April 2012, it will be deemed approved and published mid/end May 2012.
The law will give the industry until mid/end November to make the required changes.
“We have reluctantly decided to object to this list of permitted health claims as, although we do not have an issue with what has been included on the list, we want the European Parliament to seriously consider what should have been included on this list,” said Pietikäinen. “A consequence to the positive list is the publication of the so-called Union Register of rejected claims, which the European Commission has said it will publish at the same time. This negative Register could include a number of claims that should have been approved but have not due to an inappropriate and disproportionate evaluation procedure. Such is the case for fibre, which claims to help maintain normal bowel function and regularity – a well acknowledged claim.”
“The European Ombudsman is currently looking into whether the health claims regulation has been appropriately implemented by the European Commission,” said Pavel Poc, “we would like that the permitted list of claims is seriously considered and that the Union Register of negative claims is not published until we have at least heard the opinion of the European Ombudsman on this matter.”
Chris Davies has expressed his concerns that the Regulation provides for a different type of assessment for generic health claims (article 13.1 health claims) as provided under its recital 26, which appears to have been ignored, leading to the rejection of some of the claims.
