15.05.2013 Views

ALINORM 03/26/1 - codex - BSN

ALINORM 03/26/1 - codex - BSN

ALINORM 03/26/1 - codex - BSN

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

16 REP12/CAC<br />

of the draft MRLs had been considered by the 66 th Executive Committee during the Critical Review, and that<br />

some Members had felt that more efforts should be made to reach consensus through a transparent and<br />

inclusive process and had suggested that a special meeting be organized, possibly in conjunction with the<br />

session of the Committee on General Principles, in April 2012. They had also noted that informal<br />

discussions between Codex members could always take place during or between Codex sessions.<br />

88. The Chairperson explained that subsequent to his discussions with some members of the CCEXEC, it<br />

had been agreed to hold an informal meeting on ractopamine, on 5 April 2012, in the margins of the CCGP,<br />

and that the Delegation of France had kindly confirmed availability of a meeting room to facilitate the<br />

consultations. He added that the Codex Secretariat had sent an invitation on his behalf, on 4 March 2012, to<br />

all members and observers to participate in the informal discussions and that he had prepared, with support<br />

from the Vice-Chairs, a background note to facilitate the discussion. The note, in addition to some historical<br />

context, proposed the following options, which had been put forth by different delegations during previous<br />

discussions on this matter and further recognized that other possibilities might be explored to find consensus.<br />

89. The summarized options were:<br />

i. Continue to hold the draft MRLs at Step 8.<br />

ii. Discontinue the work on the draft MRLs.<br />

iii. Hold the draft MRLs in abeyance for a specified period of time.<br />

iv. Adopt the draft MRLs without a footnote.<br />

v. Adopt the draft MRLs with a footnote.<br />

90. The Chairperson provided a brief account of the informal meeting on ractopamine as follows:<br />

“The informal consultations took place as scheduled from 13:30-16:15. Several members and<br />

observers participated in the discussions. In my opening remarks, I recalled a brief account of the<br />

process between the CAC Sessions of 2010 and 2011. The Commission had voted against conducting a<br />

vote on adoption of the draft MRLs for Ractopamine as a result of which these remained at Step 8.<br />

During this informal meeting, I noted that the objective of the informal consultation was to come to a<br />

better appreciation of the relevant issues and come closer to finding consensus so as to utilize the<br />

Commission’s time more efficiently. It was recalled that the mandate of CAC is to take decisions on<br />

draft Codex standards proposed by the relevant Committees. In light of the previous discussions, the<br />

participants were asked to express their views. A summary of the general comments is as follows:<br />

- This matter has been under discussion at the Commission level for the last four Commission<br />

sessions;<br />

- All Codex requirements as per the Procedural Manual have been fulfilled;<br />

- JECFA has carried out the risk assessment three times as per the procedures and that the MRLs<br />

should be adopted as proposed by the CCRVDF;<br />

- The scientific concerns have not been fully addressed;<br />

- Consumer preferences in certain countries are against use of veterinary drugs for growth purposes;<br />

- Work on these standards should either be discontinued or be put in abeyance for some time due to<br />

lack of consensus;<br />

- Whatever option is selected must foster consensus.<br />

This was an informal meeting and not a forum for making decisions or recommendations to the<br />

Commission. I must say and I had also concluded at the end of the meeting, that the participation of<br />

several members and observers and the level of their engagement was a demonstration of the<br />

willingness of the members to continue their dialogue and discussion on this matter. There was<br />

divergence in the opinion on scientific assessment, the manner of considering consumer preferences as<br />

part of factors influencing Codex standards, and on the fulfilment of all Codex requirements to<br />

support adoption of the draft MRLs.”<br />

91. The Chairperson further recalled the efforts made to develop the various options for consensus among<br />

members of the Commission. He recalled specifically the various informal meetings that he had organised

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!