We take a look back at the long struggle to improve the information available to consumers when they are choosing what to eat.

Flashback: Food labelling

The figure is one in five for Ireland,  Malta and Luxembourg.

Causing this are a lack of  physical activity and a poor diet.

To enable citizens  to make healthier choices,

food labelling has been reformed  at European level.

It took three years of tough negotiations  for the States and Parliament to agree.

For ten years, information on food labels  has been subject to EU laws, but voluntary.

This failed:  obesity figures continue to rise.

January 2008: As an aperitif, the  Commission proposed a more binding law.

Thus began a battle between the MEPs,  representing the citizens,

and the Member States,  defending the interests of businesses.

The lobbies also made  their presence known.

I noticed that lobbying became shameless.

There were attempts to put pressure  on MEPs, something we cannot tolerate.

On the Commission’s menu of proposals:

some upsetting points  and others that seem obvious.

For starters: June 2010, the Parliament’s  first position was passed by a large majority.

They wanted to make  the nutrition declaration obligatory.

At the moment it's mandatory only  to have the ingredient list on the pack.

That will remain but, additionally,  nutrition information will be mandatory,

always per 100g or 100ml,  so the consumer can compare the products.

This nutrition declaration  should include the energy value,

the amount of fats, saturated fats,  sugar and salt contained in the foodstuff.

We must be careful about saturated fats  in relation to cardiovascular problems.

We all know these fats  are bad for our health.

A great novelty: allergens will be highlighted  so consumers will notice them,

even when the food is not packaged,  as in restaurants and canteens.

The idea seemed simple at first –  red for too much fat, sugar or salt,

orange for reasonable  and green for fully acceptable quantities.

I'm thinking of a drink like Diet Coke,  for example - will have a green light,

while semi-skimmed milk  will have an orange light

Then for the main course:  What do the 27 Member States want?

Yes to obligatory labelling,  but not necessarily on the front of pack

as MEPs and consumer  associations had hoped.

Parliament wants to have excessive  information on the front of pack,

Council says, 'that's too much,  nobody will read it, let's print nothing there'.

they have all the room  on the labels on the front of pack.

But if you have to say, 'there's also sugar',  suddenly it doesn't fit anymore.

Still on the menu:  Indication of the country of origin,

already obligatory for certain foodstuffs.

But with what sauce  will the new regulation serve it?

With the origin of each ingredient  or the place of birth, rearing and slaughter?

Many consumers want to  avoid long animal transport.

If you see an animal is born in one country,  reared in another and slaughtered in a third,

If there are 15 ingredients in your tapenade,  it’s impossible to have the origin of each.

So it’s limited to single ingredient products.

At the MEPs’ request the States  finally agreed to extend the list

to include, in addition to beef,  pork, mutton, goat and poultry.

Once the elements were picked, they were  presented to MEPs for a second reading.

And, for dessert: Summer 2011,  MEPs managed to impose legibility criteria.

Initially it was about  character height of minimum 3mm.

Between the interests of consumers  and industries,

the obtained compromise was 1.2mm  if the surface is bigger than 80cm2.

So here is the information that should  appear on food labels at the end of 2016.