ALINORM 03/26/1 - codex - BSN

20 REP12/CAC
113. The result of the secret ballot on Vote 2 was:
Ballots papers deposited: 143
Defective ballots: 0
Abstentions: 7
Votes cast: 136
Majority required: 69
Votes in favour: 69
Votes against: 67
Result: Proposal adopted; the Commission adopted the MRLs for ractopamine
in cattle and pig tissues, i.e., muscle, liver, kidney and fat.
114. The Delegation of China expressed their disappointment that the Commission did not resolve the issue
by consensus. They reiterated their position against the adoption of the MRLs for ractopamine and expressed
their reservation.
115. The Delegation of Norway strongly opposed the adoption of the draft MRLs, as they still had human
health concerns and because of the non-therapeutic use of ractopamine. The Delegation was concerned
because the draft MRLs had been pushed forward when many members had asked for a consensus-based
decision and the MRLs had been adopted despite a clear lack of consensus. They noted that without a global
agreement the MRLs would not be applicable worldwide.
116. The Delegation of the European Union stated that it was strongly opposed to the adoption of the MRLs
for ractopamine in pigs and cattle as there were outstanding concerns regarding its safety assessment. The
European Union's risk assessment body, the European Food Safety Authority, concluded that there is
insufficient data upon which to make a proposal for MRLs for ractopamine and that possible risks to human
health had not been sufficiently ruled out. As ractopamine is solely used for the purpose of growth promotion,
the European Union could not support an international standard that endorsed, or worse still, encouraged its
use.
117. The European Union, therefore, recorded its strong opposition to the adoption of the MRLs for
ractopamine by the Commission. The Delegation also underlined that, given its outstanding safety concerns,
the European Union's current legislation would remain in place. The Delegation was also of the view that the
Commission should take time to reflect upon what to do about standards held at Step 8. There had been a
number of attempts to seriously consider what to do in these cases, and yet, for a variety of reasons, these
attempts had been thwarted and no real progress had been possible. The Delegation emphasised that it was in
the best interest of the Commission to seriously reflect on this matter.
118. The European Union stressed that Codex, as a consensus-based organisation had not been well served
by what had happened at this session of the Commission. The membership of Codex, had spoken out, loud
and clear on various occasions, expressing their clear preference for matters to be decided in Codex on the
basis of consensus. By conducting a vote at this session, this preference had been blatantly ignored. The
European Union deplored not only the fact that an international standard had been set for ractopamine but
also deplored, in the strongest of terms, the manner in which this conclusion was reached. For the above
reason, the European Union recorded their strong opposition to the adoption of the MRLs for ractopamine.
119. The Delegation of the United States of America stated that they were pleased with the adoption of the
MRLs for ractopamine, but they took no pleasure in the fact that this had been a difficult decision. The
Delegation thanked the Chairpersons of the Commission and the CCRVDF for all efforts made over the years
to try to achieve consensus and to use all the tools in the Procedural Manual to find a way forward. The
Delegation expressed the wish that adopting standards in Codex through a vote should remain a rare
exception to the general rule of consensus. They looked forward to working with members to ensure that
Codex remains willing and able to make science-based and timely decisions on food safety.
120. The following delegations expressed their reservation to the adoption of the MRLs for ractopamine
and made the following comments:
- Kenya: was of the view that not all safety concerns had been addressed and that with such sustained
opposition no international standard should be set.