1. CODEX/OIE Cooperation Tom Heilandt Senior Food Standards Officer
VIDEO1
So CODEX turns 50 this year!
It is younger than me but not much.

2. James Bond also turned 50.
He is also much better known that Codex and OIE – that are largely ignored by the average consumer
Codex may never reach James Bonds fame mainly because our protection comes from prevention and that is less sexy than fighting, explosions and car chases …

3. Yes less sexy … but also much less destructive.

4. Food, glorious food So the Codex Alimentarius Commission turned 50.
BUT the knowledge in Codex is as old as mankind.
For as long as we and our predecessors have existed on this planet one of our main concerns was to find something to eat that would nourish us.
When hunting we often found beasts that looked eatable to us but could also eat us ... so we selected and domesticated animals
When gathering we often found plants that looked eatable but were poisenous ... so we selected and cultivated plants
...

5. Todays hazards in the supermarket are different …
Todays hazards in the supermarket are different …. but the goal ultimately is the same:  safe, good food in enough quantity for a good price.

6. Food safety and quality are a joint responsibility of all stakeholders in the food chain.
Two UN organisations FAO and WHO already working on related issues before (e.g. JECFA) recognised this in and decided to join forces even more to create a Commission that would serve as the international body for what we now call risk management ...
   

7. CODEX was established Protect the health of consumers
Ensure fair practices in the food trade
Coordinate all food standards work done by IGOs and NGOs
Establish and update the Codex Alimentarius

8. How we have grown … CAC1 -1963: 30 countries and 120 delegates
members
220 observers
Covering most of the worlds population (>99%)

9. C O D E X A L I M E N T A R I U S A RESULT A FORUM Standards,
guidelines and
codes of practice
Structure and process for governments and organizations to find solutions and to harmonize rules

10. Not only standards … C O D E X A L I M E N T A R I U S
Standards: prescriptive, what should be achieved: data; MRLs; commodities
Guidelines: principles and guidance how to do something (e.g. Risk Analysis)
Codes of practice: advice or procedures what to do to avoid an issue or minimise the risk

11. Codex Alimentarius Commission
Secretariat
Executive Committee
Horizontal/ general Committees
Vertical/commodity Committees
Ad-hoc intergovernmental task forces
General Principles (France)
Food Labelling
(Canada)
active
active
Fish and Fishery Products (Norway)
Processed Fruits and Vegetables (United States)
Import and Export Inspection and Certification Systems (Australia)
Residues of Veterinary Drugs in Foods
(United States)
Residuos de Medicamentos Veterinarios en los Alimentos
(Estados Unidos)
Fats and Oils
(Malaysia)
Fresh Fruits and Vegetables (Mexico)
dissolved
Fruit Juices (Brazil)
Foods derived from Biotechnology (Japan)
Sugars
(Colombia)
Spices and culinary herbs
(India) NEW
Food Additives (China)
Aditivos Alimentarios (China)
Residuos de Plaguicidas
(China)
Pesticide Residues
(China)
Processing and Handling of Quick Frozen Foods (Thailand)
Antimicrobial Resistance (Republic of Korea)
adjourned sine die
Contaminants in Foods (Netherlands)
Contaminantes de los Alimentos (Países Bajos)
Food Hygiene
(United States)
Higiene de los Alimentos
(Estados Unidos)
Cereals, Pulses and Legumes (United States)
Meat hygiene
(New Zealand)
Animal Feeding (Switzerland)
Methods of Analysis and Sampling (Hungary)
Natural Mineral Waters
(Switzerland)
Vegetable Proteins
(Canada)
Nutrition and Foods for Special Dietary Uses (Germany)
Milk and Milk Products (New Zealand)
Cocoa Products and Chocolate (Switzerland)
FAO/WHO Coordinating Committees
Africa
(Cameroon)
Asia
(Japan)
Europe
(Netherlands) NEW
Latin America and the Caribbean (Costa Rica)
North America and South West Pacific (Papua New Guinnee)
Near East (Lebanon)

12. Codex Alimentarius Commission
Secretariat
Executive Committee
Horizontal/ general Committees
Vertical/commodity Committees
Ad-hoc intergovernmental task forces
General Principles (France)
active
active
Residues of Veterinary Drugs in Foods
(United States)
Residuos de Medicamentos Veterinarios en los Alimentos
(Estados Unidos)
dissolved
Foods derived from Biotechnology (Japan)
Antimicrobial Resistance (Republic of Korea)
adjourned sine die
Contaminants in Foods (Netherlands)
Food Hygiene
(United States)
Higiene de los Alimentos
(Estados Unidos)
Meat hygiene
(New Zealand)
Animal Feeding (Switzerland)
Milk and Milk Products (New Zealand)

13. C O D E X A L I M E N T A R I U S
IN 50 YEARS Codex has developed: 100s of commodity standards 1000s of maximum residue limits (pesticides, veterinary drugs) 1000s of food additive provisions douzens of codes to prevent or reduce contamination risk analysis guidance e.g. GM foods HACCP …

14. C O D E X A L I M E N T A R I U S Voluntary* 100% Member driven
Inclusive and transparent
Based on science
By consensus (usually)

15. C O D E X A L I M E N T A R I U S Really voluntary?
Yes, however a reference in the WTO SPS agreement:
“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, 3ª)”

16. PROCEDURAL FRAMEWORK C O D E X A L I M E N T A R I U S
CAC Strategic Plan ( )
Procedures for the Elaboration
Criteria for the Establishment of Subsidiary Bodies
Criteria for the Establishment of Work Priorities.
Criteria Applicable to Commodities
Relations between Commodity Committees and General Committees.
Format for Codex Commodity Standards.
Guidelines for the Inclusion of Specific Provisions in Codex Standards and Related Texts

17. Codex standard Committee/Member FAO/WHO Expert body Commission
(adoption)
Committee or Task Force
Discussion
paper
Scientific
advice
Executive Committee
(critical review)
Project
document
S 1
Proposed draft standard S2
drafting S3
consultation S4
discussion/
drafting
Endorsement by general committees
S 5/5A
Draft standard S6
consultation S7
discussion/ drafting
S 8
Codex
standard
Hold at Step 8
Executive Committee
(critical review) - monitoring

18. Basis for the establishment of Codex standards
Sound scientific analysis and evidence based on risk analysis
Other legitimate factors
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.
When elaborating and deciding upon food standards Codex Alimentarius will have regard, where appropriate to other legitimate factors relevant for the health protection of consumers and for the promotion of fair practices in food trade”

19. Roles in risk analysis Risk Assessment (FAO/WHO - Permanent bodies,
Ad-Hoc Expert Consultations)
Functional separation + liaison
Risk Management
(Governments, CAC)
Risk Communication: Governments, FAO/WHO – Infosan, IGos

20. Risk Assessment for Codex: FAO/WHO scientific advice
Chemical hazards
Microbiological hazards
Nutrition
JECFA
JMPR
JEMRA
JEMNU
CCFA
CCCF
CCPR
CCFH
CCNFSDU
CCRVDF
Ad hoc consultations
biotechnology
Biotoxins, melamine
active chlorine
nanotechnology
TFFBT
CCFH
Etc…
CCCF

21. Other legitimate factors may be identified in the risk Management proces but:
should not affect scientific basis of risk analysis
should not create unjustified barriers to trade (particular attention should be given to the impact on developing countries)
only those factors which can be accepted on a worldwide basis should be taken into account
some legitimate concerns of governments are not generally applicable or relevant worldwide

22. Committee on Residues of Veterinary Drugs in Foods Tasks
Determine priorities for MRLs for veterinary drugs
Recommend MRLs for veterinary drugs
Develop Codes of Practice
Consider methods of analysis and sampling

23. Committee on Residues of Veterinary Drugs in Foods Recent work
MRLs for narasin, monensin, amoxicillin
Risk Analysis Principles Applied by CCRVDF and the Risk Assessment Policy for Residues of Veterinary Drugs in Foods
Risk Management Recommendations for Veterinary Drugs for which no ADI and/or MRLs could be set by JECFA due to specific health concerns: chloramphenicol, malachite green, carbadox, furazolidone, nitrofural, chlorpromazine, stilbenes and olaquindox
Extrapolation of Maximum Residue Limits (MRLs) of Veterinary Drugs to Additional Species
Use of the Concern Form for the CCRVDF

24. Committee on Residues of Veterinary Drugs in Foods Ongoing
MRLs for monepantel, derquantel, dimitridazole, ipronidazole, metronidazole and ronidazole
Draft provisions on establishment of MRLs for honey (for inclusion on the Risk Analysis Principles applied by the CCRVDF)
Discussion paper regarding the issues and concerns that impact the ability of the CCRVDF to efficiently perform its work
Database on countries’ needs for MRLs

25. Development of MRLs for veterinary drugs
JECFA 2 3 6
Codex Alimentarius Commission
CCRVDF
ADI
&
MRL 5
Call for Data 7 1 8 4 9
Residue data from the application of GVP
Toxicological data from animal and other relevant studies
CCRVDF
Priority List
Application by governments

26. Codex Committee on Food Hygiene Tasks
Elaborate Guidelines or Codes of Hygienic Practice (preferred)
Establish microbiological criteria for food commodity/pathogen combination; and/or
Tools/procedures for countries to apply other microbiological risk management metrics (e.g. FSO, PO, PC)
Determine priorities for its work on the basis of risk profile
Identify areas on which inputs from JEMRA are needed
Develop risk management questions to JEMRA
Consider methods of analysis and sampling where MCs are established

27. CCFH and Risk Analysis JEMRA Codex request FAO/WHO
FAO/WHO Expert Cons. on MRA
2002
1999
2003
Codex activities
Adoption of Codex Principles and Guidelines for MRA
2000
FAO/WHO Expert Cons. on MRA and RM
1997
Codex request FAO/WHO
to establish an advisory body on microbial hazards in foods
CCFH request advice on
specific
pathogen-commodity combination

28. CCFH Work recently finalized
Guidelines on the Application of General Principles of Food Hygiene to the Control of Viruses in Food
Guidelines for Control of Specific Zoonotic Parasites in Meat: Trichinella spiralis and Cysticercus bovis
Revision of Principles for the Establishment and Application of Microbiological Criteria for Foods
Amendments to definitions for hazard characterization, risk communication, risk estimate and risk management in the Principles and Guidelines for the Conduct of Microbiological Risk Assessment
Guidelines for the Control of Trichinella spp. in meat of Suidae
Guidelines for the Control of Taenia saginata in meat of domestic cattle
Work in Progress
Annex on statistical and mathematical considerations to the Principles and Guidelines for the Establishment and Application of Microbiological Criteria Related to Foods
Proposed Draft Code of Hygienic Practice for Low-Moisture Foods
Guidelines on the Application of General Principles of Food Hygiene to the Control of Foodborne Parasites

29. Examples for other relevant work:
Antimicrobial resistance (Rep of Korea): Guidelines for Risk Analysis of Foodborne Antimicrobial Resistance
Animal Feeding (Switzerland):
Guidelines on Application of Risk Assessment for Feed
Guidance for Use by Governments in Prioritizing the National Feed Hazards
Biotechnology (Japan): Guideline for the Conduct of Food Safety Assessment of Foods Derived from Recombinant-DNA Animals
Contaminants (Netherlands): Code of Practice for the Reduction of Aflatoxin B1 in Raw Materials and Supplemental Feedingstuffs for Milk-Producing Animals

30. CODEX/OIE Cooperation Working Group (Canada)
propose guidance to better take into account relevant work that has been undertaken or is in progress by each organization and
identify means to consistently reference each other’s standards and guidance, as appropriate

31. CODEX/OIE Cooperation Working Group (Canada) Themes
Adoption of formal structure for collaboration to increase consistency
Increased transparency through improved communication
Strengthen collaboration at national level

32. CODEX/OIE Cooperation Working Group (Canada) Themes
Adoption of systematic procedures for cross-referencing to increase consistency
Enhancing processes to identify joint priorities in areas of common interests
Improving transparency through information sharing and recognition of best practices in communication and collaboration
Strengthen collaboration at national and regional level

33. 2063: What will the future bring
More people
More food travelling the world
More countries entering the world market
More variety
More health and safety awareness in the population
= More need for harmonized rules to, ensure food safety and quality, reduce food waste and make business possible
It we look towards Codex at 100 … what will the future bring? More people most likely. More food needed and more food traded, More countries participating in international trade; more variety; more awareness in the population and certainly more need for harmonised rules such as Codex.
Disharmony leads to food rejections and interruptions of trade and almost certainly to food waste of rejected consignments. We cannot afford this! With more mouths to feed and our space not growing we need to make to most of what we have and get it to those who need it.
In 2063 hunger should not be something that we still have to deal with with.
But this will require work and especially working together …

34. ISSUES ON THE WAY Be faster than … 4.2 years
Remain inclusive and transparent while finding consensus in a heterogeneous membership
Further increase participation of developing countries
Find ways to deal with emerging issues (new diseases, food fraud)
Turn the issues of private standards from a threat into an opportunity
= Work together, use new tools, use new partnerships
With 4.2 years on the average for standard setting Codex is not doing badly but in our ever accelerating world we need to do even better. We need to us modern tools to create more possibilities for countries to interact and find agreements while remaining inclusive and transparent. Codex has shown that it can set standards within one year such as was the case for MELAMIN when we had the crisis in China.
We need to provide an even better opportunity and platform for countries to negotiate and find consensus in a heterogeneous membership with many different interests. Issues like growth hormones will remain controversial but we must try and find new ways how to address them e.g. through labelling and consumer choice.
We need to work on finding an adequate successor to the Codex Trust Fund when it runs out in 2015 to ensure that developing countries are continuing to increase their involvement in Codex.
New issues – like new diseases and food fraud. There is only one possibility – to tackle them together. Only a cooperation of research and public and private entities can make sure that we find a way to address these. Early warning systems such as INFOSAN and EMPRES food safety that have been created by FAO and WHO will help.
Over the last 10 years or so private standards have been cropping up in different shapes – from the individual company standard to international NGOs that set standards for groups of companies.
Why are private standards an issue? We spent a lot of time talking to developing countries who are keen to enter the market. In many cases they have aligned their systems to conform to codex standards. Naturally they are disappointed if a prospective importer says to them: well what you’ ve done is great but you also need to conform to our standards by the way the residue limit for this pesticide for us is 10 times lower …
Why are there private standards? Private standards are set by private entities to protect their business because in our connected world any enterprise that has a huge food safety incident will have huge losses and may not survive. The food safety crises of the 90s then led businesses to create standards that were stricter than public standards. To be absolutely safe and maybe also to say: we are SAFER.
This thinking has now mainly disappeared and there are private sector bodies that look to benchmark between different systems. Food safety is generally not seen as a tool to get advantages in competitive situations.
Food safety is a joint responsibility and there should be only one class of food safety in the world not several.
Codex has started a dialogue with a number of the private standard setters. There again is answer is not competition or one against the other but working together. To make Codex so complete that the need for many private standards disappears and where they are needed do everything to avoid bad impacts on small producers and developing countries.
We are confident that the multilateral system offered by Codex can solve all problems but only if we work together and are not stuck in our ways but embrace new ways of working and new partnerships.

35. شنكرا