|
Health
Scientific Committees
Scientific Steering Committee (former MDSC)
Outcome of discussions
Summary Minutes of the meeting of 21.11.1997
1. Welcome, apologies, introductory
remarks
Dr. H.Reichenbach, Director General of
Directorate General XXIV - Consumer policy and Consumer
health Protection - opened the meeting and welcomed the
participants. He congratulated the new members for their
election as chairpersons of the 8 scientific
Committees.
Apologies were received from Prof.
Bridges, chairman of the Scientific Committee Toxicity and
Ecotoxicity. Prof. Bridges was represented by, Prof.Helmut
Greim, second Vice Chairman of that scientific committee.
Prof.R.Kroes could only be present as from 14h00. The
complete list of participants is attached as annex
1.
In his introductory remarks
Dr.Reichenbach pointed out that the Scientific Committees,
through their work and excellency, will have to convince
the consumer that political decisions are based on sound
scientific advice. This implies that the members of the
Scientific Committees will have to help the Commission to
communicate with the European Parliament. This task will
not be easy and will take time. Dr.Reichenbach further
pointed out that the Scientific Committees and the European
Commission have a joint responsibility for defending E.U.
interests in international fora and organisations. A major
aspect is here the SPS agreement which has to be respected
by the EU and where scientific advice will be evaluated
against international standards. It was thus utmost
important that the Committee members lived up to world
standards. The methods applied should necessarily be the
best available ones so that the quality of the advises
themselves could never be questioned.
2. Mutual presentation of members of
the Scientific Steering Committee:
Each of the 8 members of the SSC as
nominated by the Commission on 29 July 1997 and the 8
Chairpersons of the Scientific Committees which became
automatically members of the SSC introduced himself.
3. Approval of the agenda
The agenda was amended (point 5.2 was
added) and the list of pending questions was updated. With
these changes the members adopted the agenda as given in
annex 2.
4. Organisation of the Scientific
Steering Committee
4.1 Information on the mandate;
B.Carsin, Director of the Directorate
Scientific Opinions on Health Matters of DGXXIV, outlined
the mandate of the Scientific Steering Committee. A summary
of his presentation is attached as annex 3.
Mr.G.Gouvras (DG V) asked whether the
appropriate the Scientific Committees (or the Scientific
Steering Committee if the question was of a
multidisciplinary nature) would also address questions in
the field of human public health. Examples of such
questions were: blood safety and blood supply sufficiency;
non-ionising radiation under high tension power lines;
surveillance and control of communicable human diseases;
etc. It was agreed that such requests should be addressed
in writing to DGXXIV for possible submission to the SSC or
to a Scientific Committee. Whether or not they fell within
the mandate of a Committee would be decided upon on a case
by case basis. Meanwhile, Prof.Greim, vice chairman of the
Scientific Committee on Toxicity, Ecotoxicity and the
Environment and Prof.Jones, chairman of the Scientific
Committee on Medicinal Products and Medical Devices stated
that such scientific support could be provided in the
fields within the competence of their respective
Committees.
In the subsequent discussion it was
agreed that, more generally, questions, which might not
obviously fall under the mandate of any scientific
committee shall be briefly discussed in view to either
identify the scientific committee(s) which could address it
or to set up a special working group if this would not be
possible. On the examples provided by DG V several chairman
stated the ability to address the questions raised by their
committees.
It was also agreed that the Scientific
Steering Committee is not, and should not become, a
"supercommittee" or "court of appeal".
4.2. Election of the chairperson and
of two vice-chairpersons
The members were informed of the rules
for the election of the chairperson and vice-chairpersons
of the SSC (see annex 4).
Prof.G.Pascal was elected Chairman with
unanimity of the votes. He thanked his fellow SSC members
for their confidence and recognised that his task would not
be easy. His main attitude as a chairman would be to listen
to all members and to take as much advantage as possible of
their complementary experiences and of the assets available
in the other Scientific Committees and in the various
services of the Commission.
After his election Prof.Pascal chaired
the meeting.
Subsequently, and following the above
outlined procedure, Prof.V.Silano was elected first and
Prof.M.Vanbelle second vice chairman.
4.3 First discussion of a draft
proposal regarding the internal rules
of procedure of the Scientific Steering
Committee (including aspects such as declarations of
interest; the handling of confidential material;
etc.).
The SSC secretariat presented a first
draft outline of the proposed internal rules of procedure
of the Scientific Steering Committee and the reimbursement
of cost and payment of indemnity procedures. A short,
initial exchange of ideas was already held, but a further
in-depth discussion will take place during the following
SSC meetings. In preparation to this discussion, the SSC
Secretariat will send to all members a written version of
the draft proposed rules of procedure.
In the discussion it was proposed that
scientific opinions, once they are ready for adoption by a
Scientific Committee, should first be adopted "ad interim"
and released to the public (including consumer
organisations, scientific and professional organisations,
etc.) for possible comments to be formulated within a
number of days (for example: 60 days). On the basis of
these comments, the opinion could then possibly be refined
and eventually be adopted in its final version. Such
procedure would largely enhance the transparency of the
work of a scientific committee and of the content of an
opinion. It was agreed that Prof.Gibney writes a reflection
paper on this, which should also list the advantages and
drawbacks of such an approach.
Other items mentioned to require further
attention and clarification in the internal RoP:
The criteria to be used and procedure to
be followed when possibly completing the present
memberships of the 8 Scientific Committees;
Clear definition of Working Groups,
their role and function;
The procedures to be followed when an
advise is requested as a matter of emergency.
4.4 Constitution of the TSE/BSE ad hoc
group of the Scientific Steering Committee (including
initial membership; chairmanship; date of first meeting;
etc.).
On the basis of the Commission
Communication on Consumer Health and Food Safety of
30.04.97 and of Commission Decision 97/404/EC setting up
the Scientific Steering Committee and creating the frame
for the TSE/BSE ad hoc group, the general mandate of the
TSE/BSE ad-hoc group was outlined by the Commission.
A first, not exhaustive, list of
questions to be addressed by the group was attached to the
agenda of the meeting, given in annex 2.
The SSC agreed that the ad-hoc group
should be composed of a permanent core team, completed with
a roster of experts in specific fields who would be called
upon if required. The core team will be composed as
follows:
- the chairperson, who should obligatory
be a member of the SSC;
- other members of the Scientific
Steering;
- one representative of each of the
Scientific Committees on Animal Health and Animal Welfare;
Veterinary Measures relating to Public Health; Animal
Nutrition and Food;
- 6 - 8 external experts.
Prof.M.Gibney was unanimously elected
chairperson.
Prof.M.Vanbelle, Prof. P.James and
Prof.A.Osterhaus were appointed members of the ad hoc
group.
It was agreed that the further
composition of the group should be established during the
next SSC meeting. Meanwhile the chairpersons of the above 4
Committees should identify the members of "their"
scientific committees who should become member of the core
team of the TSE/BSE ad-hoc group. The names of Prof. Piva
(for SCAN) and Dr.Vanopbenbosch (for the Animal Health and
Animal Welfare) were mentioned, but the chairpersons would
first formally consult them before they should officially
be invited to become member of the TSE/BSE ad hoc group.
Prof.Kemper proposed Prof.A.Somogyi as a possible external
expert member of the TSE/BSE ad-hoc group. DGXII stated
that DGXII - Research Directorate General disposes of a
list of more then 100 excellent TSE experts. The list would
be made available to the SSC, as an additional help for the
identification of the members of the roster of
experts.
4.5 Dates of the next meetings and
general planning (calendar) of the meetings in
1998
The date for the next meeting was set to
8-9 December 1997; start 14h00, end 16:30.
For what concerns the meetings in 1998,
the proposal of the SSC secretariat to always hold two days
meetings, normally on Thursday and Friday of the third week
in each month, was in principal accepted. A possible
meeting calendar for 1998 would be attached to the agenda
of the meeting of 8-9 December 1997 and should be adopted
at that meeting.
5. Multidisciplinary matters.
5.1 Draft list of pending questions, on
which the SSC needs to decide how these should be handled
and by which Scientific Committee an opinion should be
formally adopted. Discussion on how to address these issues
and initial planning. (See attachment to the adopted
agenda given in annex 2).
Regarding matters related to BSE:
Because of the urgency of the matter,
only questions related to BSE were discussed. The following
approach was agreed upon:
The highest priority questions, on which
- if possible at all - an opinion should be adopted during
the next meeting of 8-9 December 1997 are:
The UK proposals for a Date Based Export
Scheme and for the Offspring Cull;
Specified risk materials;
Criteria ("compliance matrix") for the
evaluation of the TSE status of a country.
The safety of tallow
The safety of meat and bone meal.
The following working groups where set
up or rapporteurs nominated:
The UK proposals for a Date Based Export
Scheme and for the Offspring Cull.
Rapporteur: Prof.M.Wierup.
Proposed working group members:
Dr.E.Vanopdenbosch, Dr.M.Groschup, Prof.P.Willeberg and
Prof.M.Savey.
Mandate: To analyse the recent UK
proposals and to prepare an opinion on their scientific
viability for eventual adoption at the next meeting of the
SSC.
Specified risk materials.
The existing working group, established
on 16.10.97 and chaired by Prof.James, was
confirmed.
Members: Prof. Dieringer, Dormont,
Gibney, Somogy, Vicari, Will, Willeberg, Osterhaus, Wierup,
Dr.Bradley.
Mandate: To establish if the SRM list
included in the SRM decision of July 1997 is still valid
and, if changes are needed, to justify these changes by new
scientific information or changed interpretation of old
information, and to outline the implications of these
changes. The question of an age threshold and other
parameters determining these implications should also be
addressed.
Criteria ("compliance matrix") for the
evaluation of the TSE status of a country.
Rapporteur: Prof.F.Kemper.
Mandate: On the basis of the work
already carried out by the Scientific Committee on Animal
Health and Animal Welfare and the Scientific Committee on
Veterinary Measures relating to Public Health, who analysed
the applications of New Zealand, Australia and USA, the
rapporteur will prepare a draft harmonised list of criteria
against which applications may be evaluated and on the
basis of which countries may possibly be requested to
provide additional information.
For what concerns the evaluation of each
application submitted by a Member State or a Third country
to be declared free of any TSE or of scrapie and/or of BSE,
it was agreed that the BSE/TSE ad hoc group would at least
evaluate the presently submitted applications from Denmark,
Sweden and Finland. This will allow to further refine the
list of criteria. It was left open whether future
applications should be evaluated by (a working group of)
the TSE/BSE ad hoc group, or by the Commission Services on
the basis of the final version of the compliance
matrix.
The safety of tallow and of meat and
bone meal.
The existing working group, established
on 16.10.97 and chaired by Prof.Vanbelle was confirmed.
Members: Prof.G.Piva, Prof.D.Dormont, Dr.D.Taylor and
Prof.M.Wierup. It was agreed that also Prof.M.Pocchiari
would be invited to participate in the activities of this
working group.
Mandate: To finalise its work and to
prepare draft opinions for eventual adoption by the SSC on
its next meeting.
The planning of the work related to the
other pending questions related to TSE/BSE (see the list
attached to annex 2), was referred to the BSE/TSE ad hoc
group. Regarding the safety of gelatine, it was pointed out
that also the utilisation of gelatine in food products
should be addressed.
The discussion on the other
multidisciplinary questions not related to BSE was referred
to the next meeting of the SSC
5.2. Requests for scientific advice on
one genetically modified winter rape seed variety and on
three genetically modified maize varieties.
The genetically modified plant varieties
are:
Maize Mon 810 with Bacillus
thuringiensis (Bt) gene, notified by Monsanto Europe. This
application covers both import into and sowing in the
Community. As consignments are in transit this application
is very urgent.
Maize Novartis - Bt. This maize appears
to have a different biotechnological construction to that
of the previously authorised maize of Ciba-Geigy. The
notification concerns the importation and industrial
processing for human, animal and industrial uses. The
application does not seek authorisation for sowing in the
Community.
Maize AgrEvo France - Bt and herbicide
resistant (glufosinate ammonium). This maize seems to be a
different construction to the other modified maize. The
application concerns import and cultivation.
Colza AgrEvo UK - Bt and herbicide
resistant to glufosinate ammonium. This actual requested
application concern only importation of seed for processing
although the original application was also for sowing in
the Community.
Scientific advice is requested on the
potential risk of these plant varieties for food safety or
consumer health in its widest sense. As this touches the
mandates of several scientific committees the question is
of a clear multidisciplinary nature, and its treatment
therefore had to be discussed by the SSC.
The Scientific Steering Committee
decided that the Scientific Committee for Plants would act
as leading Committee for this specific issue and asked that
scientific committee to complement its working group with
experts from the Scientific Committees on Toxicity,
Ecotoxicity and the Environment; Animal Nutrition and on
Food. The SC-Plants should receive the report of this
working group and eventually adopt the opinion on the four
plants.
As it is expected that many similar
requests for scientific advice related to GMOs will be
received, the SC-Plant was requested to gain, from the
analysis of these first 4 dossiers, the experience for
establishing standardised analysis criteria, evaluation
methods and risk assessment approaches, to be applied to
future dossiers.
A preliminary, more general, discussion
was also held on how the SSC would address in the future
the multidisciplinary questions related to genetically
modified organisms. Although further discussion is needed,
it was clear that the questions principally related to the
novel food directive would have to be addressed by
multidisciplinary teams under the leadership of the
Scientific Committee on Foods and that questions
principally related to the plant related aspects, such as
the deliberate release into the environment of genetically
modified plants (Council Directive 90/220/EEC of 23 April
1990) would be addressed under the leadership of the
Scientific Committee on Plants.
6. Reports by the chairpersons of
the 8 Scientific Committees.
All eight chairmen of the scientific
committees gave a short update on the activities of their
committees, which all had dealt during their first meeting
mainly with procedural matters such as election of
chairpersons and vice-chairpersons.
The complete minutes of these meetings
will be made available to all SSC members. Urgent questions
already tackled included:
SC-Food: Lindane in Baby food: is the
opinion issued in 1994 still valid ?
SC-Animal Nutrition: Three Safeguard
Clauses are pending and WG have been established.
SC-Animal Health and Animal Welfare: For
17 pending questions on animal health issues and one on
animal welfare, the scientific committee established
working groups.
SC-Veterinary Public Health: Inventory
of pending questions was made and work started for the most
urgent once.
SC-Plants: The list of pending questions
was discussed and priorities identified. Reacting to a
request of the Commission a working group on GMOs was
constituted for treating four genetically modified plant
organisms pending permission to enter the European market.
The chairman further underlined that with only 15 members
the committee is not fully covering all areas of competence
and has hence to work frequently with external ad-hoc
experts.
SC-Cosmetic and Non-Food Consumer
Products: 5 working parties are established and all members
already informed. The first (UV-filters) will meet on 16
December 1997.
SC-Medicinal Products and Medical
Devices: Only administrative business and discussion of the
mandate. As a new committee the SCMPD has no pending
questions from previous periods.
SC-Tox, Ecotox and Environment: The list
of pending questions was discussed during its first meeting
and as particular problem the borderline to the SCC-NFP and
the SC-Plants was identified.
7. Reports by Commission services on
matters related to consumer health.
Due to time constraints this point was
reported to the next meeting of the SSC.
8. Any other business.
No other business were put on the
agenda.
The meeting was closed at 18h00.
Annex 1: List of participants in the
Scientific Steering Committee meeting of
21.11.97:
Members of the MDSC/SSC:
Dr.Georges Bories, president, Scientific
Committee on Animal Nutrition
Prof.Helmut Greim, vice chairman,
Scientific Committee on Toxicity, Ecotoxicity and the
Environment, representing Prof.Dr. James W.Bridges,
Chairman
Prof.Dr.F.Garrido-Abellàn, Chairman,
Scientific Committee on Animal Health and Animal
Welfare
Prof. Michael J. Gibney
Prof. Philip James
Prof.Dr.Keith H.Jones, Chairman,
Scientific Committee on Medicinal Products and Medical
Devices
Prof.Dr.med. Fritz H.Kemper, Chairman,
Scientific Committee on Cosmetic Products and Non-Food
Products intended for Consumers
Prof. Dr. Werner Klein
Dr. Ib Knudsen, Chairman, Scientific
Committee on Food
Prof. Dr. Robert Kroes (only after
14:00)
Prof.Dr. Albert Osterhaus, Chairman,
Scientific Committee on Veterinary Measures relating to
Public Health
Prof. Gérard Pascal
Prof. Vittorio Silano
Prof.Dr. Antonio M.S. Silva-Fernandes,
Chairman, Scientific Committee on Plants
Prof. Dr.Ir.Marcel Vanbelle
Prof. Martin Wierup
Apologies were received from:
Prof.Bridgens, chairman of the Scientific Committee on
Toxicity, Ecotoxicity and the Environment.
Experts:
Prof.A.Somogyi
Participants from the Commission:
P.Deboyser, O.Rohte, J.A.Nunes (DG
III)
G.Gouvras, L.Chambaud (DG V)
P.Colombo (DG VI)
J.Kioussi (DG XI)
B.Hansen, X.Goenaga, M.L.Vidal(DG
XII)
H.Reichenbach, B.Carsin, P.Brunko,
J.Costa-David, C.Deckart, M.de Sola, M.A.Granero Rosell,
J.Kreysa, G.Morrison, W.Penning, J.Moynagh, J.J.Rateau,
A.Sanabria, S. van de Louw, A.Van Elst, R.Vanhoorde,
P.Vossen, M.Walsch, P.Wagstaffe: (DG XXIV)
Annex 2:
Agenda of the Scientific Steering
Committee (SSC) meeting of 21 November 1997 - Final
1. Welcome, apologies, introductory
remarks
2. Mutual presentation of members of the
Scientific Steering Committee:
3. Approval of the agenda
4. Organisation of the Scientific
Steering Committee
4.1 Information on the mandate;
4.2 Election of the chairperson and the
two vice-chairpersons;
4.3 First discussion of a draft proposal
regarding the internal rulesof procedure of the Scientific
Steering Committee (including aspects such as declarations
of interest; the handling of confidential material;
etc.).
4.4 Constitution of the TSE/BSE ad hoc
group of the Scientific Steering Committee (including
initial membership; chairmanship; date of first meeting;
etc.).
4.5 Dates of the next meetings and
general planning (calendar) of the meetings in 1998;
5. Multidisciplinary matters.
5.1 Draft list of pending questions, on
which the SSC needs to decide how these should be handled
and by which Scientific Committee an opinion should be
formally adopted. Discussion on how to address these issues
and initial planning. (See attachment).
5.2. Requests for scientific advice on
three genetically modified maize varieties and on one
genetically modified winter rape seed variety.
6. Reports by the chairpersons of the 8
Scientific Committees.
7. Reports by Commission services on
matters related to consumer health.
8. Any other business.
Attachment to the SSC Agenda of
21.11.97
Non exhaustive list of pending questions
on which the SSC needs to decide how these should be
handled and by which Scientific Committee an opinion should
be formally adopted.
1. Matters of a multidisciplinary nature
but not related to BSE
Possible human and animal risks related
to the authorised commercialisation of recombinant Bovine
Somatotropine in the E.U.;
Possible links between Johnes disease
and Crohns disease.
Genetically modified organisms (GMOs):
requests for scientific advice on three genetically
modified maize varieties and on one modified winter rape
seed variety.
2. Matters related to Transmissible
Spongiform Encephalopathies
Questions of highest priority:
The UK Date Based Export Scheme;
The Offspring Cull proposal;
The UK proposal for an amendment to the
BSE eradication and control plan to address the issue of
maternal transmission;
Possible transmission of nv-CJD via
infected human blood;
(With regard to specified risk
materials:) propose a scientifically exact and pertinent
definition of "high risk", "low risk" and "Specified Risk
Material";
Specified risk materials (SRMs):
definition and listing;
Safety of meat and bone meal;
Safety of tallow;
Safety of gelatine, in particular as
ingredient of pharmaceutical products and for all
industrial uses;
List of criteria ("compliance matrix")
needed for the evaluation of the TSE status of a
country.
Request from Finland, to receive the
status of scrapie- and BSE-free country;
Request from Denmark, to receive the
status of BSE-free country;
Request from Sweden, to receive the
status of BSE-free country;
Claim from Canada to be BSE free;
Environmental aspects and risks related
to the disposal of possible BSE infected material:
Disposal of BSE infected material: the
plan proposed by UTG and submitted via the E.P.;
Other pending questions:
Safety of peptides and amino
acids;
Safety of bi-calcium phosphate;
Safety of organic fertilisers derived
from animal material;
Environmental aspects and risks related
to the disposal of possible BSE infected material:
Evaluation of a set of studies carried
out to assess the risks from various aspects of the
disposal of material arising from the BSE situation:
Efficacy and safety in terms of the
elimination of the BSE agent, of incineration and power
stations using BSE infected cattle waste as
combustible.
Efficacy and safety in terms of the
elimination of the BSE agent, of various methods for the
burial of BSE infected cattle waste.
Further discussions on the possible
routes of infection to explain maternal transmission of BSE
and risk assessment for these routes; options to mitigate
the risk from these routes;
Possible initiation of a risk assessment
and transmission studies for animal-derived rennet;
Scrapie infectivity of peripheral nerves
of sheep: risk of transmission to man and animal of TSE
agents through the use of red meat from sheep and goats, if
the tissue and organ location preference of a TSE infective
agent is species- rather then agent specific.
The issue of feeding meat and bone meal
to fur animals.
Possible risks associated with the use
of (pneumatic) stunners during the slaughtering process of
cattle.
Annex 3:
Mandate of the Scientific Steering
Committee, presentation by Bertrand Carsin, DG XXIV-B at
the first meeting of the SSC, 21 November 1997
(Original: French - a translation is
planned)
Pour aider la Commission dans
lélaboration dune politique de protection de la santé des
consommateurs, le CSD a un rôle majeur à jouer, un rôle qui
nétait pas prévu auparavant, cest à dire avant la
décision linstituant le 10 juin 1997, un rôle que la
Commission avait défini dans sa communication du 30 avril
1997.
Quel est ce rôle?
1) Coordonner les travaux des Comités
Scientifiques institués ;
2) Emettre des avis scientifiques
;
3) Assister la Commission par une
activité de veille, dalerte.
Coordination
1. Evaluer,
suivre,
harmoniser, si nécessaire, les méthodes
de travail des comités scientifiques.
Premier exercice en la matière : le CSD
sera saisi des règles proposées de fonctionnement des
différents comités.
2. Identifier les comités impliqués
lorsquune question exige la consultation de plusieurs
dentre eux (en dautres termes organiser le travail des
comités lorsquune question est de nature
pluridisciplinaire).
Examiner les avis émis (lorsque
plusieurs avis sont émis).
(si nécessaire) Assurer une vue
densemble (c.à.d. si ces avis présentent des divergences
sensibles, veiller à ce quune synthèse cohérente soit
assurée).
Un exercice en la matière est soumis au
CSD avec la question des GMO.
3. Evaluer, à la demande de la
Commission, la nécessité dun avis scientifique au plan
communautaire et par quel comité il doit être
fourni,
lorsque des mesures communautaires sont
fondées sur lévaluation réalisée par des scientifiques
appartenant à des organisations des E.M.
Exemple :. système dautorisation des
pesticides fondé sur des évaluations nationales : une
peer-review au plan communautaire sera mise en place sous
lautorité du CSD.
Emission davis
1. Emission davis scientifiques, à la
demande de la Commission, seulement sur les questions qui
ne tombent pas dans le mandat de lun ou lautre comité
scientifique.
2. Emission davis scientifiques sur les
aspects multidisciplinaires des EST et notamment
ESB.
Il crée à cette fin un groupe ad hoc
présidé par un des siens.
Assistance, alerte, veille
Il sagit là largement du domaine de
linitiative propre du Comité.
1. Identification des domaines où une
consultation obligatoire des comités devrait être prévue.
Exemple : est-ce que les GMO méritent une telle
consultation ?
2. Alerte de la Commission sur toute
question émergente en matière de santé des
consommateurs.
3. Veille à la révision des procédures
dévaluation des risques existantes et proposition,
éventuellement, de mise au point de nouvelles procédures
dévaluation des risques dans des domaines tels que les
maladies dorigine alimentaire, la transmissibilité des
maladies animales à lhomme...
Certains aspects de ce mandat doivent
être soulignés.
1. Le CSD sera la principale source
davis scientifiques dans le domaine TSE/BSE.
En effet, ce domaine est très largement
multidisciplinaire, au sens où la plupart des questions
soulevées en la matière relèvent de lexpertise appartenant
à plusieurs comités scientifiques.
Le sous-groupe BSE/TSE sera une
structure permanente du CSD et comme la liste des questions
à traiter latteste, une structure très active.
Ce sous-groupe nadoptera pas davis,
cette fonction appartenant au seul CSD. Ce sous-groupe
préparera ces avis.
Il est dès lors dune grande importance
que la composition par les soins du CSD de ce sous-groupe
se fasse avec les membres et les experts les plus
appropriés.
2.Le CSD, cest une fonction importante,
na pas seulement le droit dinformer, dalerter la
Commission sur les sujets importants, nouveaux, qui sont
dintérêt pour la santé des consommateurs, mais il devrait
aussi fonctionner comme une sorte à la fois de gardien et
de garant de méthodes scientifiques les plus solides en
matière dévaluation des risques.
Pour ce faire il devrait être en contact
avec la littérature scientifique et les actualités touchant
à la protection de la santé des consommateurs et à la
sûreté alimentaire ; il devrait connaître les implications
pour les décideurs politiques des résultats des dernières
recherches.
3. Le CSD a une fonction qui relève
clairement de lévaluation des risques.
Il nest pas dans son rôle en
fournissant des avis en matière de gestion des
risques.
Toutefois les choses ne sont pas
toujours aussi tranchées.
Si lexpertise scientifique constitue
une démarche autonome, indépendante (tout lexercice qui
nous amène à cette première réunion aujourdhui répond à ce
souci essentiel) elle nen est pas moins une démarche qui
ne peut être coupée de la réalité politique, sociale,
juridique.
En dautres termes, lexpertise
scientifique nest pas un exercice purement intellectuel
qui fait fi des enjeux en cause, une démarche qui ignore la
portée de lavis émis.
Il ne sagit pas, ceci étant dit, de
confondre, de fusionner deux démarches, je le répète,
autonomes et différentes.
Mais autonomie de lune par rapport à
lautre ne veut pas dire ignorance de lune par lautre. Il
ne sagit pas dopposer mais de concilier, certains même
diront de réconcilier, le scientifique et le politique. Il
sagit de les rendre compatibles cest à dire, tout en
sauvegardant leur caractéristiques propres, leur
spécificité, de renforcer leur interdépendance.
Sans vouloir utiliser de grands mots,
cest en quelque sorte le défi qui nous est lancé.
Lentreprise nest pas facile et une
responsabilité importante et particulière pèse sur le CSD à
cet égard. Son travail, nouveau, sera largement analysé,
disséqué, critiqué.
Annex 4:
Rules for the election of the
chairperson and vice-chairpersons of the SSC:
a simple majority of the total number of
members is required, regardless whether they are all
present. Thus 9 votes or more are needed to be
elected;
If there is more than one candidate and
after the first round of voting nobody has the necessary
number of votes, the candidates with the most votes would
be subject to a second round of voting until one reaches
the necessary majority. In case of deadlock the procedure
may re-start (new nomination);
SSC members could propose themselves or
a colleague as chairperson or vice-chairperson;
Each proposed candidate has to be asked
explicitly whether he or she would be willing to accept the
position as chairperson or vice-chairperson of the
SSC.
The Uruguay Round GATT Agreement on the
Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures.
Once adopted, these rules of procedure
will be made publicly available.
[
©]
- [
HEALTH] - [
SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEES] - [
SCIENTIFIC STEERING COMMITTEE]
- [
OUTCOME OF
DISCUSSIONS]
| 
