David Byrne: Challenges of Traceability, GMOs and the Chinese Melamine Scandal
18 February, 2008 - The feed and food industries are at fault for failing to convince consumers that GM produce is safe, former European Commissioner David Byrne has said in an exclusive interview with Feedinfo News Service.
Mr Byrne, who was the EU Commissioner for Health and Consumer Protection from 1999 to 2004, has also criticised politicians in the European Council for refusing to authorise GMO foods that its own scientists in the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) have deemed safe.
His candid comments were made in a wide-ranging discussion that tackled other vital topics such as traceability, and how leading companies that become beacons of good practice in this area not only guarantee safer food but will also thrive in today's market of more discerning consumers.
Mr Byrne also gives his assessment of how well the feed industry has responded to the safety regime he was instrumental in instigating, and outlines the challenges that still lie ahead. Topics such as China’s safety record, whether traceability can survive EU enlargement, as well as the prospects for, and obstacles to, a global regulatory system are all covered.
When Mr Byrne became European Commissioner for Health and Consumer Protection in 1999, the feed and food industries were reeling after a catalogue of scandals ranging from BSE to dioxins. As consumer confidence in feed and food plummeted, the EU pledged to overhaul its safety systems. Mr Byrne, was charged with this vital reform and during the next five years his department steered through almost 80 pieces of legislation that have revolutionised feed and food safety, including the removal of all antibiotics from animal feed.
The former barrister and Attorney General in the Irish Government is widely recognised as the architect of the structures regarding traceability, rapid response and recall that now serve as the global blueprint for feed and food safety systems.
Although Mr Byrne left office over three years ago, he continues to be closely involved with the feed and food industries as a non-executive director of animal health and nutrition giant Alltech.
In the first part of the interview, Mr Byrne reflects on his EC legacy, examines the fundamental importance of traceability in the feed and food markets, how best practice is vital in today’s competitive environment and the way the controversy over the safety of Chinese produce has “concentrated minds at a high level”.
[FEEDINFO] – How would you sum up your achievements from your time as European Commissioner?
[DB] - I think the legacy can be summed up under three pillars; firstly, science with the establishment of EFSA. It was one of the fundamental pillars of President Prodi’s administration. Secondly, law with the passing of legislation dealing with specific issues like food and feed additives and feed hygiene. Thirdly, food and feed control systems to ensure the work being undertaken by the scientists that was ultimately placed into law was properly enforced by the competent authorities in the member states.
A lot of work had to be done and so much of it was crisis driven.
[FEEDINFO] - Under your mandate it is fair to say food and feed safety was revolutionised. Did the industry have to be forced into changing or was there real co-operation from companies in the sector?
[DB] - I think the industries in Europe were very scared because they realised so much had gone wrong and that something had to be done. They were probably apprehensive that whatever was going to come through was going to have a significant and negative impact on costs. But over a period of time, industry, particularly the feed industry, realised this was absolutely necessary and that their reputation was of critical importance because so many of the diseases and crises started out as animal feed problems, like BSE and dioxins.
The feed industry was not well thought of in Europe at the start of the Prodi mandate and I think they realised something had to be done about it. Over time, there is a conviction I believe, that the route we have travelled is a good one and the status of the industry is rising - and that needed to be done.
[FEEDINFO] - How are you connected to the feed industry today?
[DB] - I’m doing a lot of work at Alltech. Dr Pearse Lyons, who I’ve regarded for a long time as a visionary scientist and business leader, and I became friendly during my time in the Commission. I became convinced of the ideas he had for leading the industry were the correct ones. His company was clearly an important voice and was expressing itself in public as to the right way forward.
[FEEDINFO] – What is your role within Alltech?
[DB] - I’m a non-executive director of the company. I’m a member of the Risk Overview Committee. We are constantly looking to see what we can do to ensure that if a crisis comes along we are in a position to handle it effectively and quickly with the minimum of disruption to the company and the minimum of risk to consumers.
[FEEDINFO] - Traceability is one of the cornerstones of the safety system you helped put in place. What are the main problems of achieving traceability?
[DB] - Traceability is misunderstood in many respects. It is a risk management tool. Under EU law, this means the ability to track any food, feed or food producing animal or substance used for consumption through all stages of production, processing and distribution. It is sometimes referred to as one step backwards and one step forward. In many respects it is not difficult to implement, it just needs to be done. Food imported into the EU must have traceability from the border. This is the general position. However, specific traceability requirements may be imposed on an exporting country to the EU in vertical legislation dealing with a specific product or subject matter.
But gaps exist especially in some regions of the world which do not have their own internal traceability system. That presents a problem for global risk management. It doesn’t present a huge problem for Europe in that if you are able to identify a problem with produce of a particular type from a particular country then you close down all the imports of all that produce from that country. But it is very disruptive of trade.
We really need to encourage a good, high-level debate in the international institution that is the Codex Alimentarius to ensure progress in that area. The rules of Codex already identify and define what traceability is, much as we have done in the EU, but it hasn’t yet made traceability an operational requirement.
That is an issue being discussed in Codex right now. I think some countries are afraid there are extra costs. But the benefits are huge. The EU and US represent the importation of 70 pct of the world’s food. Having a reliable form of traceability will enhance the safety, reputation and quality of food for the benefit of producer and consumer alike.
[FEEDINFO] - Are we asking too much to expect global traceability - given the costs and technical know-how needed to implement and enforce such systems?
[DB] - No I don’t believe we are. Traceability can be established. It is not that difficult. At a very basic level it requires keeping the identity of the company you bought from and the identity of who you sold on to. This is the first big step and it can achieve an enormous amount to protect consumers.
[FEEDINFO] - Where does China fit into this?
[DB] - Those of us in the business knew there was a problem in China going back a number of years. During my time as Commissioner, I had to ban importation of rabbit, chicken, crustacean and honey into the EU for a period of time because of the presence of banned residues. But once those difficulties were pointed out, the authorities in China rectified the situation and the import bans were lifted for that reason.
The melamine problem we saw some months ago has alerted people there are continuing problems. But it concentrated minds in the US that these problems exist and standards have to be established. The consequence of all of that is the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has established good relations with the regulatory authorities in China. The EFSA people have gone to their counterparts in China to put protocols in place. My successor at the EU and the US Secretary of State have both been to China. It has had the effect of concentrating people’s minds at a very high level in full view of the public to ensure progress can be made in this area.
I believe the Chinese authorities now realise it is not possible not to take this issue seriously in the global market. Progress has been made and there is more progress to be made.
[FEEDINFO] – So you think economic expedience will be a driver for reform in this area?
[DB] - That’s right. If it becomes public that food from China is being refused entry into the EU or US, the biggest import trading blocks in the world, that has adverse economic impact on their trading ability.
[FEEDINFO] Are you confident the traceability system can survive EU enlargement?
[DB] - That is a challenge. I was there during the enlargement of the 10 in 2004. Inevitably the systems that existed in the countries that have recently become members of the EU were not as robust as in the established EU 15.
But I think a lot of progress has been made in that area and I haven’t heard any complaints. And the authorities of the EU members states realise that if failures occur there are safety measures that can be taken by the EC that have adverse consequences for the authorities and industries or companies failing to comply with standards. No such safety measures have ever been taken.
[FEEDINFO] - Do you think that the culture of traceability now evident in the EU is being exported to other regions in the world?
[DB] - Generally, the standards required by EU law are being exported by reason of the fact it is the biggest importing region of food in the world. Therefore food producers outside the EU who wish to trade inside know they must maintain those standards.
And if they maintain their standards for the EU, why not maintain those for exports elsewhere? That is the question any company will ask itself. They will go out there and market themselves as being a company producing food to EU standards even where that is not required. But that will have a reputational spin off and make their products more attractive. So that has the inevitable indirect consequence of EU standards spreading.
|
David Byrne
David Byrne served as the first EU Commissioner for Health and Consumer Protection between 1999 and 2004, during one of the most difficult periods for the feed and food industries.
Responding to such crises as BSE and SARS, he was responsible for a raft of highly significant laws and regulations governing food and feed safety that are now widely perceived as setting the global standard for excellence.
Among his many other achievements in office, Mr Byrne also established the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) and introduced new legislation to combat foot-and-mouth disease. He also oversaw the adoption of the first European Food Law and framework on GMOs.
Prior to his role as Commissioner, he was Attorney General in the Irish Government from 1997 to 1999, playing a prominent role in negotiating the historic Good Friday Agreement.
Mr Byrne served as a barrister from 1970, practising law in Ireland’s Superior Courts as well as in the European Court of Justice, specialising in Constitutional, Civil and European Law.
Amongst other activities, Mr Byrne is currently the Chancellor of Dublin City University.
|
 
 |
 |
 Previous Page
Contact Us | About Us | Copyright
|