As this is my last column for Food Manufacture before I move on to pastures new, I thought it would be a good opportunity to look back over the last three years to see how we have progressed regulatory-wise.
The recurring themes have inevitably been nutrition and health claims, for which we are just waiting the final text; allergen labelling, which is of course now embedded while we search for the solution to the next problem of cross-contamination; fortification, which is still in the balance, but with a resolution in sight; and genetically modified organisms, the labelling of which has hardly had a measurable impact on consumers (or has it?).
In amongst these longer term issues, I actually started my column writing on a proposal to create a positive list of enzymes used as processing aids. Thankfully, that one has taken a back seat as other issues took the limelight.
The question of novelty has also featured highly in my columns, including the cross over with traditional herbal medicines. Interestingly, the European Commission (EC) has just issued a consultation on the revision of the novel food regulation, which will run until August, so there's an opportunity to get your views in now.
We've also looked at the progress of the EC flavours list, for which deadlines are eternally prolonged. This has had a stifling effect on novelty within the flavours industry and begs the question: Is the 2007 deadline realistic?
It would be impossible to review the last three years without a mention of the Sudan 1 crisis. At the peak of the crisis in February 2005, thousands of products were affected. It seems that the measures put into place have had a positive impact as there have been few (if any) recalls in 2006!
All in all, it's been a colourful (no pun intended) three years of regulatory observations, and I hope it has made for interesting reading. I shall now save the caustic comments for other avenues!
Jean Feord is business manager for legislation, Leatherhead Food International''