OpenLobby.EU
Explore

Forbrugerrådet Tænk (the Danish Consumer Council)

Forbrugerrådet Tænk is Denmark's independent consumer council representing 90,000 individuals and 27 organisations to strengthen consumer empowerment.

Lobbying Activity

Meeting with Kira Marie Peter-Hansen (Member of the European Parliament)

11 Dec 2025 · Networking

Danish Consumer Council rejects tracking exemptions and AI delays

14 Oct 2025
Topic — The Commission is consulting on a digital package to simplify and update EU regulations.
Message — The Council opposes allowing statistical tracking without consent and rejects delaying the AI Act. They believe current risks to safety and fundamental rights require immediate regulation.12
Why — This approach ensures that consumer protections are not sacrificed for administrative simplicity.3
Impact — Businesses lose the simplified tracking options and administrative relief provided by the proposed changes.4
Read full response

Meeting with Per Clausen (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur)

10 Oct 2025 · Discussing the Chemical omnibus

Danish Consumer Council demands paper instructions for digital products

3 Sept 2025
Topic — A regulation updating product legislation to address digital information and common specifications.
Message — The organization insists that safety instructions must be provided in both paper and digital formats. They also suggest moving CE marking to digital files to prevent consumer confusion.12
Why — Maintaining physical documentation ensures that consumers without internet access or digital skills remain protected.3
Impact — Manufacturers would incur higher production costs by providing both physical and digital documentation.4
Read full response

Danish Consumer Council urges mandatory paper instructions for products

3 Sept 2025
Topic — Legislative proposal to update product safety and information for the digital age.
Message — The council insists that product instructions be provided in both paper and digital formats. They also suggest moving CE markings to digital files to avoid consumer confusion.123
Why — This protects consumers who lack digital literacy or internet access from safety risks.45
Impact — Manufacturers would face higher costs by providing dual documentation and performing risk assessments.67
Read full response

Response to Revision of the 'New Legislative Framework'

2 Sept 2025

The Danish Consumer Council supports the feedback given by our European organisation ANEC, see the attached file ANEC-WP1-2025-G-050final.docx
Read full response

Danish Consumer Council Urges Stronger Digital Protections for Consumers

29 Aug 2025
Topic — The EU is establishing its strategic consumer policy and action plan for 2025-2030.
Message — The council proposes a Digital Fairness Act to regulate addictive designs and influencer marketing. They demand online marketplaces be held legally responsible for the safety of products they host. They also suggest funding consumer groups using fines from companies that violate EU laws.123
Why — Enhanced competition and strict regulation would provide members with cheaper products and more choice.4
Impact — Rogue traders and non-EU marketplaces would lose profits derived from bypassing safety regulations.5
Read full response

Meeting with Kira Marie Peter-Hansen (Member of the European Parliament)

27 May 2025 · EU chemicals policy

Meeting with Niels Flemming Hansen (Member of the European Parliament)

14 May 2025 · consumer affairs

Meeting with Stine Bosse (Member of the European Parliament)

14 May 2025 · Food policy & comsumer protection

Meeting with Michael McGrath (Commissioner) and

13 May 2025 · Consumer policy

Meeting with Sigrid Friis (Member of the European Parliament)

14 Nov 2024 · PFAS restriction

Meeting with Andreas Schwab (Member of the European Parliament) and Verbraucherzentrale Bundesverband and

2 Oct 2024 · Priorities for the consumers agenda

Meeting with Henrik Dahl (Member of the European Parliament)

2 Oct 2024 · Exchange of views

Meeting with Per Clausen (Member of the European Parliament)

2 Oct 2024 · Vigtige sager på forbrugerområdet

Meeting with Sigrid Friis (Member of the European Parliament)

2 Oct 2024 · Discussion on key consumer issues for the coming years

Meeting with Kristoffer Storm (Member of the European Parliament)

1 Oct 2024 · Consumer protection

Meeting with Christel Schaldemose (Member of the European Parliament)

1 Oct 2024 · grønne omstilling i EU, techgiganterne, uønsket kemi; handelsplatforme ansvarlige for produkter

Meeting with Stine Bosse (Member of the European Parliament)

1 Oct 2024 · Online platforms and health & safety policy

Meeting with Kira Marie Peter-Hansen (Member of the European Parliament)

1 Oct 2024 · Consumer protection, regulating large platforms, REACH revision and circular economy

Meeting with Rasmus Nordqvist (Member of the European Parliament)

1 Oct 2024 · Møde med Forbrugerrådet Tænk

Response to Reporting indicators relevant for the General Product Safety Regulation

14 May 2024

The Danish Consumer Council supports the reply to the public consultation given by BEUC and ANEC
Read full response

Danish Consumer Council urges total ban on harmful bisphenols

8 Mar 2024
Topic — Proposed EU restrictions on Bisphenol A and other bisphenols in food packaging.
Message — The Council demands a total ban on BPA and similar chemicals across all food contact materials. They advocate for group regulation to prevent substitution with other harmful bisphenols. They also oppose unlimited sell-off periods for existing products.123
Why — Consumers would benefit from reduced exposure to substances that damage fertility and hormones.4
Impact — Packaging manufacturers would face significant technical and administrative challenges during product reformulation.5
Read full response

Response to Modalities for consumers and other interested parties to inform the Commission about potentially dangerous products

1 Mar 2024

The Danish Consumer Council supports the replies from our European organisations ANEC and BEUC. In addition we suggest that the European Commission should publish an annual report describing type of complaints reported into the system and how they have been handled and solved. The annual report should be publicly available.
Read full response

Meeting with Christel Schaldemose (Member of the European Parliament) and Bureau Européen des Unions de Consommateurs and The European Consumer Voice in Standardisation

28 Nov 2023 · toys safety regulation

Response to Revision of the Toy Safety Directive

27 Oct 2023

Congratulations to the Commission on presenting a valid proposal for a new regulation on toys aimed at protecting our children, the most vulnerable citizens. Forbrugerrådet Tænk agrees with the conclusions from the Impact Assessment and we are pleased to see that a lot of these have been incorporated in the proposal. We welcome the revision of the Toy Directive and fully support transforming the directive into a regulation. We support the ban on endocrine-disrupting and suspected endocrine-disrupting substances, on substances which can cause allergic reactions in the airways and on STOTs (Specific Target Organ Toxicity) similar to CMR substances. This is vital to the protection of our most vulnarable citizens, the children. The proposal suggests that the substances currently prohibited in products for children aged 0-3 should also be banned in toys for children of all ages. We fully support this. We also support the ban on the use of bisphenol A, but we encourage its expansion to include all bisphenols. In the attached paper we also highlight other positive sides of the proposal. We do, however see, a few shortcomings, and we are particularly worried about: - derogations - lack of labelling - online shopping In the attached document, our views are elaborated. Sincerely yours, Claus Jørgensen Forbrugerrådet Tænk
Read full response

Meeting with Manuela Ripa (Member of the European Parliament, Rapporteur)

18 Sept 2023 · Detergents Regulation

Danish Consumer Council Urges Ban on Hazardous Chemical Exports

4 Jul 2023
Topic — EU proposal to prohibit the export of hazardous chemicals already banned within Europe.
Message — The Council supports banning exports of hazardous chemicals already prohibited in the EU. They argue this measure should have been implemented simultaneously with domestic bans to eliminate double standards.12
Why — Consumers would be protected from banned pesticides that currently return to the EU through imported food.34
Impact — Chemical manufacturers would lose revenue from hundreds of thousands of tons of restricted exports.5
Read full response

Response to Revision of the specifications for EU-wide Multimodal Travel Information Services (Delegated Regulation 2017/1926)

28 Jun 2023

Forbrugerrådet Tænk, The Danish Consumer Council, welcomes the proposal to improve consumer experience when booking cross border train and multimodal tickets. Many consumers want to choose travel forms with a smaller climate impact, which among other things means shifting some or part of their journeys from airplane to train. For this to happen in a larger scale, we cannot just appeal to the good will of the consumer. We have to make the multi modal travel possibilities made far easier to choose and more attractive to use. Forbrugerrådet Tænk supports the recommendations from BEUC, the European Consumer Organisation (see: https://www.beuc.eu/position-papers/mind-gap-making-multimodal-journey-easy-journey-beucs-position-multimodal-digital). We find it important that the ambitions in the proposal is maintained or even lifted. If it is downgraded to soft measures to transport operators, it will not bring the necessary added value to consumers. In this matter we support the opinion in the joint letter to European Vice-President Timmermans from BEUC and European Passenger Federation together with eight other organizations (see Multimodal Digital Mobility Services Friends of MDMS call for ambition, halfway measures are unacceptable (see BEUC-X-2023-074_Open_Letter_to_EVP_Timmermans_Multimodal_Digital_Mobility_Services.pdf).
Read full response

Danish Consumer Council urges full chemical transparency on packaging

30 Mar 2023
Topic — A revision of EU rules for the classification and labeling of chemicals.
Message — The council demands mandatory disclosure of all chemical names and ID numbers on packaging. They also push for the inclusion of suspected endocrine disruptors in hazard classifications. Furthermore, they recommend limiting labels to three languages and creating central databases.123
Why — This would allow consumers to make safer choices by identifying hazardous substances during purchase.4
Impact — Small manufacturers may struggle with costs and technical requirements for centralized digital reporting.5
Read full response

Response to Safety requirements to be met by European standards for certain children products (excluding toys)

2 Sept 2022

The Danish Consumer Council welcomes and supports the EC draft decision with the following comments: We strongly support a hazard-based approach when developing safety requirements and welcome that all relevant hazards have been identified and listed in the draft and we welcome the clarification to the existing mandates and to connected products. We also find it very positive that special needs of users with disabilities – both the safety for carers and children – are now covered in the Annex. However, we find that the following areas should still be strengthened: Precautionary principle: The precautionary principle is and has for many years been an important tool in the General Product Safety Directive. Although, we agree that the “safety requirements should reflect the new scientific and technical knowledge and the market evolution”, we find that the precautionary principle should be better reflected, in order to also guide the development of standards as well as the design and safety assessment of children products. Accident and injury data: In addition to “anthropometric data, medical research, known health advice (...) and state-of-the-art scientific and technical knowledge regarding children’s safety and/or health” accident and injury data are also very important to take into account. Severity of the risks: The safety requirements associated with each hazard (listed in the Annex) should reflect the severity of the risks resulting from the hazard. Where there is a high probability of a hazard resulting in death, or long term or disabling injury, the hazard should be ‘eliminated’. In situations where the severity of injury is generally less, it may be sufficient to ‘limit’, but not necessarily eliminate, the hazard. For more specific changes please see the comments from ANEC which we support. Chemical hazards: It is of utmost importance to find options to protect children against combination effects and we support the comments from BEUC to the “Evaluation of the Toy Safety Directive, chemicals strategy for sustainability: Which way forward?” see https://bit.ly/3KCL0UH. And we urge to update point 1 of the Annex in line with these comments. In addition we suggest, to ensure transparency of which chemicals are used in products for children, that an obligatory declaration of the chemical content should be introduced for all products for children. This will enable the consumers to make an informed decision (do I want to buy a product containing these chemicals?) at the point of sale. Also, consumer organizations will be able to gather information about the chemical content and hence be able to inform the consumers about which products contain problematic chemicals. Article 1 Scope: It is not clear from the scope whether sports, playground and recreational equipment are covered. If not, we request that these products will be covered here or that a separate COM Decision on the safety requirements to be met by European standards for these products will be set up. Additionally, we fully support the comments submitted by ANEC and BEUC
Read full response

Meeting with Christel Schaldemose (Member of the European Parliament)

29 Jun 2022 · fødevarepolitiske og fødevareprojekter.

Response to Revision of the Toy Safety Directive

1 Nov 2021

Forbrugerrådet Tænk welcomes the EC’s inception impact assessment, which contains many points we agree with. We welcome a revision of the TSD and we agree that the main aspects to be tackled are chemical risks, internet-connected toys, and compliance & enforcement. We suggest mandatory labelling of the chemical content in toys. Labelling like we know from food and cosmetics. This will enable consumers to make an informed choice. This way consumers can also avoid chemicals not yet regulated, because the regulatory process is lengthy. Please see further comments in the document attached (answers from BEUC and ANEC), which we support. Sincerely, Claus Jørgensen and Helen Amundsen, Forbrugerådet Tænk
Read full response

Response to EU Chemicals Strategy for sustainability - Revision of the Cosmetic Products Regulation

1 Nov 2021

Forbrugerrådet Tænk welcomes the EC’s inception impact assessment, which contains many points we agree with. We welcome a revision of the Cosmetics directive. We would like to emphasize the need to address combination effects. In line with the CSS new legal provisions which take into account consumers’ combined exposure to ingredients of concern from all sources needs to be introduced. Not only exposure from cosmetics, but also from water, food, electronics and other consumer goods. This requirement must however not be limited to only the most harmful chemicals, as the IIA indicates. Also, in line with the above, consumers needs to be better protected in situations where scientific evidence is insufficient, inconclusive or uncertain. A ‘One Substance, One Assessment’ process should support this objective as the IIA indicates. This is especially relevant when it comes to potentially endocrine disrupting chemicals. Mandatory labelling information on the webpage or online marketplace where a product is made available for purchase by EU consumers must be implemented. This must however never replace on-product labels as this would hinder easy, immediate access to essential information We have seen that the Commission allows claims of "sensitive" even when a product contains allergenic chemicals. Denmark disagreed but was overruled by the Commission. Also we see many green colors and flower and the like indicating natural/organic etc. and then the products still contain EDCs, or other allergenic chemicals. The field of green/health/sensitive claims needs to be revised as well. We would also like to call for a labelling of products which contain know allergens. Could be a label on the front: ‘Contains allergenic fragrances/preservatives’. This will help the consumers make an easy decision in the sales moment. Finally, it is imperative that a new cosmetics regulation includes bans/restrictions on chemicals that have negative effects on the environment. Please see further comments in the document attached (answer from BEUC), which we support. Sincerely, Claus Jørgensen Forbrugerrådet Tænk
Read full response

Response to Review of the general product safety directive

4 Oct 2021

Forbrugerrådet Tænk strongly supports the proposed General Product Safety Regulation. We agree on the specific objectives and welcome: - Value of the safety net function and precautionary principle -Coherent market surveillance rules between harmonised and non-harmonised products as well as the new tools given to Member States -Stronger traceability in the supply chain and a greater responsibility for safety of online marketplaces -New provisions on connected products -Clear rules on product recalls -Risk assessment to also cover the needs of vulnerable consumers, environmental aspects and the safety of child appealing products -Criteria for penalties and more consistent enforcement -Commission’s new powers to adopt impl. measures and set up spec. traceability requirements -Enforcement work of the Consumer Safety Network to be closely coordinated with the enforcement network for harmonised products -Benefits of cooperation with consumer groups for enforcement -Strengthened international cooperation on product safety We urge co-legislators to address the following concerns : -Loopholes with regard to online marketplaces must be closed. Their obligations must be further clarified and strengthened so all enforcement actions could ultimately be addressed to them. The general safety requirement in article 5 should be addressed to online marketplaces and they should be defined as importers. -An obligation for mandatory collection of accident and injury data in a pan-European database should be added. -Recall notices should always be published - The provisions on remedies for consumers in case of recalls stipulate that economic operators could instead of repairing or replacing the recalled product also opt for refunding the (remaining?) value. To allow consumers an informed choice, information must be given about the different options, the dangers, and their consequences. -Beside risk-based market surveillance, random checks should also be performed so dangerous products that were not on the radar can also be detected. -Higher conformity assessment procedures should be applied in relation with the level of risk. In addition, because the GPSR only contain a gen. safety requirement, we believe that add. clarity is needed on how specific safety requirements are set and their relationship with standards: -The definition of a safe product does not contain anymore the points to be considered for such definition. These are now under article 7. However, we see a need to explicitly link those criteria of article 7 to article 6 to ensure the criteria must be considered by European Standardisation Organisations. Further, we suggest deleting the first half sentence of article 7 ‘Where the presumption on safety in article 5 does not apply’. This deletion clarifies that the criteria of article 7 apply to all relevant actors at any moment, legislators, economic operators, standards makers and enforcement authorities. -The implementing acts with the specific safety requirements should be legally-binding and be detailed enough to be enforced directly. A hazard-based approach should be followed during the development of safety requirements and the drafting of standards. The safety levels set out in the requirements should be relevant to the significance of the hazards and risks and be defined by the policy-makers, not the ESOs. As the ESOs do not have to accept the Standardization Request related to the Commission Decision, no legal certainty exists for economic operators and market surveillance authorities in the absence of standards . The voice of consumers in the ESOs must continue to be heard. The position of business interests in European standards can undermine the broader consumer interest. The role of ANEC is crucial in influencing the content of standards to benefit all consumers. We also call on public authorities to become more engaged in standardisation and support consumer participation in standardisation at national level.
Read full response

Response to Simplification and digitalisation of labels on chemicals (CLP, Detergents, Fertilising Products)

20 Sept 2021

The Danish Consumer Council thanks the Commission for the opportunity to comment on the Inception Impact Assessment on the simplification and digitalization of labels on chemicals. We believe that consumers need more information, not less. And the consumers need the information at point of sale. The chemical content (all the chemicals) should be listed for the benefit of the consumer, who then can make an empovered decision (often with help from NGOs). Information can in addition (but not in stead) be made available online (digital product passport). We agree with BEUC, that product labels should be made to work for consumers by clarifying and further developing the labelling requirements, as indicated in the IIA, including for health and environmental hazard related to e.g. endocrine disruption. Obligations to label products that fall outside the current CLP Regulation (such as cosmetics or medicines) for their environmental impacts should be introduced. The labelling exemption for small containers should be deleted; where for practical reasons it is impossible to provide the mandatory information on the affixed on-product label, an option to provide it through attached leaflets should instead be introduced, taking inspiration from Regulation (EC) No 1223/2009. Digital labelling must not replace on-product labels but could play an important complementary role. Protect consumers against dangerous mixtures sold online by introducing new rules governing internet sales, as indicated in the IIA. In line with Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011, suppliers should be obliged to prominently display the mandatory labelling information on the webpage or online marketplace where a product is made available for purchase by EU consumers. Such rules would enable consumers to make informed purchasing choices and contribute to raise their awareness on safe use of hazardous mixtures, while also facilitating official controls and market surveillance of online sales. This would help consumers when shopping online, and they are in doubt with whom they are buying products from. If there is an ingredient list they could assume that the online dealer follows EU legislation. No ingredient list - they could be based outside the EU. If digital labels are introduced as a supplement to on package labelling, it is essential that the information is gathered by an EU entity, because the information provided needs to be harmonised. We see it with the newly released SCIP database where it is difficult for consumers to make informed choiced based on the information available in SCIP – it’s too complicated. If the companies themselves upload the information on their websites, it will be very difficult for the consumers to find any information, and if they do, out experience is that it is not up to date. Detergents and other cleaning products are equipped with unique UFI-codes and these and the information behind the codes could be used together with a full labelling on the packaging. We look forward to see the results of this hearing.
Read full response

Response to Revision of EU legislation on hazard classification, labelling and packaging of chemicals

1 Jun 2021

Forbrugerrådet Tænk arbejder bl.a. for at sikre at forbrugere ikke udsættes for skadelig eller uønsket kemi. Forbrugerrådet Tænk bakker op om den ambitiøse EU Chemicals Strategy (CS), og mener at alle mål i denne skal opfyldes. Forbrugerrådet Tænk støtter introduktionen af nye fare klasser, fx for de hormonforstyrrende stoffer, men vi vil også insistere på, at stoffer klassificeret under CLP ikke bør forekomme i forbrugerprodukter. For Forbrugerrådet Tænk er det vigtigt, at forbrugerne får oplysninger om, hvilke kemikalier der er i produkterne i salgsøjeblikket. Derfor bør ingredienserne i alle forbrugerprodukter være obligatorisk mærket på produktet, så forbrugerne kan foretage et oplyst valg. Denne information kan også (ikke i stedet for) være tilgængelig online (fx i Digital product passport). Forbrugerrådet Tænk opfordrer til at der tilføres flere midler til kontrol udført af de nationale myndigheder. Forbrugerrådet Tænk støtter i øvrigt BEUCs høringssvar.
Read full response

Response to Revision of EU legislation on registration, evaluation, authorisation and restriction of chemicals

1 Jun 2021

Forbrugerrådet Tænk har i årevis arbejdet på at få den skadelige og uønskede kemi ud af forbrugerprodukter. Forbrugerrådet Tænk arbejder på at synliggøre, hvor den skadelige og den mistænkte kemi forekommer, og rådgiver forbrugerne, så de kan foretage et oplyst valg. De seneste 6 år har Forbrugerrådet Tænk gennemført mere end 100 produkttest, og der er altid flere alternativer uden uønskede kemi. For Forbrugerrådet Tænk er det vigtigt at EU kommissionens Chemical Strategy (CS) bliver realiseret. Inception Impact Assessment (IIA) fremhæver nogle tiltag, gør dem optionelle, mens andre er udeladt. Forbrugerrådet Tænk må insistere på at CS bliver gennemført til gavn for mennesker og miljø. Forbrugerrådet Tænk bakker fuldt ud op om, BEUCs høringssvar. Derudover mener Forbrugerrådet Tænk, at det er essentielt at sikre gennemsigtighed om, hvor kemikalier forekommer, og derfor mener Forbrugerrådet Tænk, at der skal ske en større forpligtelse til at oplyse, hvilke kemikalier der er anvendt i forbrugerprodukter. Forbrugerrådet Tænk mener, at alle forbrugerprodukter skal bære en obligatorisk kemisk indholdsfortegnelse, som vi kender det fra kosmetik og fødevarer. På den måde sikres gennemsigtighed, og forhandlere, leverandører og producenter er nødt til at sikre, at informationen om kemikalierne er tilgængelig i gennem hele leverandørkæden. Forbrugernes ret til viden om SVHC stoffer bør styrkes. Den nuværende ordning med svartider på 45 dage er uholdbart, svartiden bør være 1-2 dage, optimalt bør svaret være at finde at-point-of-sale i før nævnte obligatoriske indholdsfortegnelse. Forbrugerrådet Tænk er i mod nedlæggelsen af nuværende godkendelsesordning. Godkendelsen bør ske på EU niveau, og ikke i national staterne. Vurderingen af risici ved bestemte kemikalier bør også medtage udsættelsen for kemikalier brugt i fødevarer. Titaniumdioxid er et godt eksempel på et kemisk stof, der snarligt forbydes i fødevarer, men som er tilladt i fx kosmetik.
Read full response

Response to Setting of nutrient profiles

3 Feb 2021

As members of the European Consumer Organisation BEUC, we support the organisation’s response (BEUC-L-2021-014/CPE/ECA/cm) to the revision of Regulation (EU) No. 1169/2011 on the provision of food information to consumers (FIC Regulation). With this letter we would like to bring up some further comments to be considered in this revision. 1. Country-of-origin labelling As highlighted by BEUC there is a growing demand from consumers to know the origin of food, and several Member States have met the consumer demand by enacting national laws going beyond EU requirements. This calls for mandatory country-of-origin labelling requirements so that all European consumers can enjoy similar levels of information. At least, country-of-origin labelling should be applicable for those foods/ingredients for which consumers’ interest is the strongest as identified by BEUC. We welcome EU-level action to extend origin labelling requirements and have a strong preference for policy option 2, namely mandatory origin indication provided at national level (Member State or third country). Indications such as ‘EU’, ‘non-EU’ or ‘EU and non-EU’ are not meaningful for consumers. It is also not sufficient, that the food manufacturers can simply state that the main ingredient originates from another country than the food itself, and it should not be up to the manufacturer to decide on the geographical level of precision. 2. Date marking Food waste is an important issue for consumers and consumer organisations, also in Denmark, and therefore we welcome any action meant to help European households cut food waste at home. We consider the date marking distinguishing between “use by” and “best before” as one tool to help reduce food waste in the households. In our view, the policy options 1 (seek to expand the list of foodstuffs for which the ‘best before’ date is not required) and 2 (abolish the concept of ‘best before’ date) altogether deprive consumers from available information and are potentially counterproductive to the aim of reducing food waste. The 2015 Eurobarometer poll showed that if the ‘best before’ date was removed, many consumers would be inclined to throw away food without date marking. We favour option 3 which seeks to improve the expression and presentation of date marking. In Denmark, we have good experience with the added terminology “best before – often good after”, which arose as an initiative from a food waste app and was implemented by several food producers. Consumer understanding of date marking varies across European countries – and so could the understanding of alternative/additional wording or symbols. Thus, it is important that any contemplated revised date marking terminology is tested through proper consumer research at national level and it would be valuable to involve the expertise from consumer organisations. We thank you in advance for considering the above comments and remain at your disposal for any question(s) you may have. Kind regards Laura Kirch Kirkegaard, director, The Danish Consumer Council
Read full response

Response to Review of the general product safety directive

1 Sept 2020

The Danish Consumer Council strongly supports the announcement of the European Commission to review the General Product Safety Directive. We agree to the problem definition as outlined in the roadmap which emphasises the challenges posed by new technologies, e-commerce and a fragmented legislative framework for market surveillance. Concerning the policy options, we recommend Option 4 as a full revision of the legal instrument is indeed necessary to address the safety risks brought by the Internet of Things and Automated Decision Making, to clarify and tighten the obligations of all actors in the supply chain, including online marketplaces, and to ensure consistency with complementary legislation. However, as this option 4 will include repealing the current GPSD, the legislator must keep in mind that the GPSD has proven a landmark piece of consumer protection in the single market which requires keeping its basic principles as fundamental pillars. The GPSD must continue to: • function as a safety net which will be able to cover gaps in sector specific legislation and for all those consumer products for which no specific rules have been established • be based on the precautionary principle and allow market surveillance authorities to withdraw products from the market based on this principle to take away safety risks from consumers. Besides the need to address new challenges, we insist that the GPSD has certain shortcomings which were intended to be tackled through a reform in 2012 but have never been solved. Those must not be forgotten and we therefore also see a need to: • Making it possible to apply more demanding conformity assessment procedures • developing criteria that assess the safety of child appealing products • collecting EU-wide accident and injury data eg. to help improving safety standards • improving the functioning of the Safety Gate • using the GPSD as a tool to reduce consumer exposure to harmful chemicals • Ensuring quicker market intervention and emergency legislation Furthermore, we agree to the aim of the Commission to increase recall effectiveness. While recalls are only the last resort to avert risk for consumers, common criteria at EU level may be useful to ensure better and faster recalls without disadvantaging consumers in different EU countries. The European Commission has played an important role in recent years to strive for better cooperation of national market surveillance authorities. Unfortunately, the number of controls at national level are still insufficient and it is urgent to equip market surveillance authorities with more human, technical and financial resources. Beneficial actions such as the exchange of market surveillance officials and joint laboratory testing should be continued to step up enforcement of product safety rules. To establish a future proof safety framework in the EU single market, it will be important that a GPSD reform closes loopholes with regard to international e-commerce and the safety of connected products. To this end, it must work well and flawless in combination with other policy reforms such as the Product Liability Directive and the Digital Services Act. The EU should also ensure that imports always comply with EU product safety rules. Besides better cooperation between customs authorities and market surveillance authorities, this should also be addressed in the Trade Policy Review and by the Chief Trade Enforcement Officer. The EU should also encourage international cooperation between market surveillance authorities in its trade agreements and at WTO level. Finally, we also fully support the position paper from BEUC and ANEC, see attached file Helen Amundsen, Senior Technical Adviser
Read full response

Response to Chemicals strategy for sustainability

19 Jun 2020

Klimakrise, Coronakrise og ikke at forglemme kemikaliekrise. Det er på høje tid, at der kommer endnu mere fokus på de store udfordringer, som brugen af skadelig kemi har for vores samfund, mennesker og miljø. Forbrugerrådet Tænk støtter ”zero-pollution” ambitionen for et ”toxic-free environment,” og mener, at det er essentielt, at EU går forrest. Her er vores kommentarer til Kommissionens roadmap: Uvildig forbrugerinformation. Borgere i EU er bekymrede for de uønskede kemikalier i forbrugerprodukter. Det viser EU's egen tal. I DK har Forbrugerrådet Tænk Kemi de seneste 5 år oplyst forbrugerne om, hvor den uønskede kemi befinder sig via kemiske test af produkter, hjemmeside, Facebook, og ikke mindst to apps, Kemiluppen og Tjek Kemien. Og forbrugerne er galde for informationerne og bruger dem flittigt. Indsatsen er finansieret af den danske stat, og EU kunne finansiere lignende initiativ på europæisk plan. Vi stiller os gerne til rådighed og deler de erfaringer vi har opsamlet de seneste 5 år. Art 33 i REACH Forbrugere har ret til at få at vide, om der er SVHC stoffer i deres produkter. Erfaringer fra projektet LIFE AskREACH viser allerede efter 6 mdr, at mange virksomheder ikke svarer, eller svarer forkert. Der er behov for mere håndhævelse og samarbejde mellem myndigheder (ECHA), SCIP databasen og LIFE AskREACH. Cirkulær økonomi Den største udfordring for den cirkulære økonomi er brugen af skadelig kemi. Hvis vi ikke får den ud, vil den skadelige kemi cirkulere til skade for mennesker og miljø. Derfor må Kommissionen sikre, at der sker en udfasning af skadelige kemikalier, således at det er indtænkt i designfasen, og på den måde bakke op om the Circular Economy Action Plan. Fødevarekontaktmaterialer Der er stort behov for en revision, og Forbrugerrådet Tænk har med tilfredshed noteret at Kommissionen har lagt op til en revision. Vores test af fødevarekontaktmaterialer viser, at den uønskede kemi forekommer i al rigelighed i produkterne. Ja tak til ”et stof – en vurdering” Forbrugerrådet Tænk bakker op om ‘one substance – one assessment’. Det nytter ikke, at et stof kan være forbudt i legetøj, men tilladt i andre produkter, der er beregnet til børn, eller i fødevareemballage. En hurtig start-løsning kunne være at tage den strengeste regulering på enkelt stofniveau i de forskellige sektor-lovgivninger, og gøre det gældende horisontalt. Cocktail-effekten skal inddrages Forskning har vist, at kemiske stoffer med samme effekter kan forstærke hinandens negative effekter. Kommissionen bør opdatere reguleringen af kemikalier, således at der tages højde for cocktaileffekten. Det er særligt relevant for reguleringen af hormonforstyrrende stoffer. Fuld indholdsdeklaration på forbrugerprodukter Forbrugerrådet Tænk har længe krævet en kemisk indholdsdeklaration på forbrugerprodukter, som vi kender det fra fødevarer og kosmetik. På den måde kan forbrugerne forholde sig til det kemiske indhold, inden de køber produktet. Kommissionen bør udarbejde bindende regler for fuld deklaration af kemikalier i materialer, artikler, produkter og affald. Opbakning og finansiering af SCIP databasen Støt op om SCIP databasen, og sikr at forbrugere har adgang til informationerne fx gennem appen Tjek Kemien (Scan4Chem). Forbyd flere stoffer Forbrugerrådet Tænk Kemi samlede i maj 2019 resultaterne fra de test af produkter til børn, som projektet har gennemført siden 2015 (mere end 500 produkter, blandt andet balloner, skoletasker, plastikbolde, børnetyggeggummi, autostole, legeslim, fidgetspinners mv.). 1 ud af 5 fik den dårligste bedømmelse, fordi de indeholder kemikalier, der er mistænkt for at være hormonforstyrrende eller kræftfremkaldende. EU bør forbyde stoffer, der er, eller er mistænkt for at være, hormonforstyrrende, allergifremkaldende, kræftfremkaldende, reproduktionsskadende og/eller miljøbelastende. Forbrugerrådet Tænk bakker i øvrigt op om høringssvaret fra BEUC og EEB. EEBs krav til en grøn kemikaliestrategi: https://bit.ly/319Fy7h
Read full response

Response to Amendment of the Toy Safety Directive to introduce limit values for formaldehyde

4 Feb 2019

The Danish Consumer Council can support the limit values set out in the proposal. CMR substances should not be present in products for children, and until there's a consensus on the among the stakeholders, these limit values are steps in the right direction.
Read full response

Response to Amendment of the Toy Safety Directive to adapt the migration limits for aluminium

4 Feb 2019

The Danish Consumer Council can support the lower limit values for aluminium in toys.
Read full response

Response to Labelling fragrance allergens

21 Dec 2018

Hermed følger Forbrugerrådet Tænks høringssvar til Labelling fragrance allergens. Forbrugerrådet Tænk mener, at det er vigtigt, at holde fast i at mærkningen skal være på selve produktet. Der er stadig mange forbrugere, der ikke har smartphones, og som dermed ikke kan finde informationen i købssituationen. Og selv hvis der var krav om, at der skal være scannere i hver butik, så er det ikke realistisk at alle butikker, der sælger kosmetik vil have én, og det vil indebære øgede omkostninger for hver enkelt forretning, der vil fordyre produkterne for forbrugerne. På de produkter, hvor der kan være pladsmangel, kan udfordringen måske løses ved et krav om, at der skal være en tekst på produktet, om at ”produktet indeholder særligt allergifremkaldende stoffer – scan evt. stregkoden, klik ind på webside eller spørg i butikken for at få at vide præcist, hvilke stoffer der er tale om.” Der skal være ingredienser på produktet - E-labelling kan være et godt supplement til de digitale forbrugere. Forbrugerrådet Tænk mener, også at der skal indføres krav om ingredienslister på internetsider (e-shops) – i dag er de undtaget, og du har derfor som forbruger ikke mulighed for at gøre meget i forhold til at vælge bestemte stoffer fra. Dette bør tages med i undersøgelsen. Vi kan oplyse, at der i databasen bag Forbrugerrådet Tænk Kemis app, Kemiluppen, er 7.980 produkter, som indeholder ”parfum” (ud af 14.633 produkter i alt) – tal trukket d. 14/12-2018 – altså over 50% indeholder parfume, og de ville skulle have flere ingredienser på. I forhold til argumentet om at produktingredienslisterne bliver meget lange, så er det jo ikke sikkert, at produkterne skal have alle 62 nye stoffer på. Måske er der tale om et par stykker eller måske op til ti. Det må undersøgelsen forsøge at få et overblik over. Forbrugerrådet Tænk vil også gerne appellere til, at man involverer Videnscenter for Allergi: https://www.videncenterforallergi.dk/allergi-og-eksem/parfume/allergi-parfume-hyppighed/ I Kommissionens oplæg fremgår det, at mellem 1-3% lider af parfumeallergi, men i DK er tallet altså 4,1% og stigende – ifølge Videncenter for Allergi. I Danmark har Miljøstyrelsen lige kørt en kampagne, https://naturaltalents.dk/parfumeallergi - den må Kommissionen også gerne inddrage i deres arbejde. Endelig vil vi påpege, at når man først har parfumeallergi, så slipper man ikke af med den. Og jo tidligere, man starter jo større risiko er der for at man får allergi. Derfor er det vigtigt at man kan se hvilke stoffer man udsætter sin hud for og derfor skal alle de nye parfumestoffer fremgå af deklarationen. Med venlig hilsen Claus Jørgensen Projektchef Forbrugerrådet Tænk
Read full response

Meeting with Stig Joergen Gren (Cabinet of Vice-President Andrus Ansip) and Confederation of Danish Industry and

6 Nov 2018 · DSM general, eCommerce, data, copyright

Response to Commission Implementing Regulation on the provision of voluntary indication of origin or place of provenance of foods

1 Feb 2018

The Danish Consumer Councils comments to draft - Commission Implementing Regulation on COOL for the primary ingredient(s) of a food The Danish Consumer Council welcomes the opportunity to comment on the draft EC implementing regulation concerning the labelling of the origin of a food’s primary ingredient(s) when it differs from that of the food itself (Art. 26”3) of Reg. (EU) 1169/2011). The comments are also attached as a pdf. Unfortunately the draft does not meet the EU consumers’ expectations for food origin information, and if implemented, it may even end up being very confusing for the consumers. Origin labelling should be mandatory Studies done by BEUC show that 70% of Europeans want to know where their food comes from (1). Demand is even stronger for meat and milk – both sold fresh and used as an ingredient – for which over eight in ten EU consumers want to know the origin (2,3). This calls for mandatory country-of-origin labelling requirements. If not on all food, then at least for those foods/ingredients for which consumers’ interest is the strongest. Furthermore we would like to comment on the specific content of the drafts Article 2. It should be stated which country the main ingredient is from Indications such as ‘EU’, ‘non-EU’ or ‘EU and non-EU’ are not meaningful for consumers. It is also not sufficient, that the food manufacturers can simply state that the main ingredient’s originates from another country than the food itself. BEUC’s survey on COOL carried out in Austria, France, Poland and Sweden found most consumers want to know the specific country their food comes from (4). Therefore it should be stated which country the main ingredient is from and not be up to the manufacturer to decide on the geographical level of precision. The place of provenance (e.g. farming) should be stated on the products It is also problematic if the manufacturer gets to decide whether to indicate the place of last substantial transformation or the place of provenance (e.g. farming). This will result in confusion for the consumer as different manufacturers will choose differently. BEUC’s research (5) showed consumers are in general most interested to know the place of farming of a food’s primary ingredient(s). Therefore we believe it should be mandatory to indicate the place of provenance (e.g. farming) on the products. 1: BEUC (2013). Where does my food come from?: http://www.beuc.eu/publications/2013-00043-01-e.pdf 2: European Commission (2013). Report on mandatory origin labelling for meat used as an ingredient in processed foods: https://ec.europa.eu/food/sites/food/files/safety/docs/labelling_legislation_com_2013-755_en.pdf 3: European Commission (2015). Report on mandatory origin labelling for milk and milk used as an ingredient in dairy products: https://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/sites/agriculture/files/milk/origin-labelling/com-2015-205_en.pdf 4: 50% (in France) to 78% (in Sweden) of consumers said they want to know the country their food comes from. Most of those not interested in the country of origin said they want to find even more precise information on the label, i.e. the region their food comes from (from 13% in Sweden to 36% in France). Only 4% (in Austria) to 13% (in Poland) of consumers were satisfied with EU/non-EU labelling. 5: BEUC (2013). Where does my food come from? : http://www.beuc.eu/publications/2013-00043-01-e.pdf
Read full response

Response to Recast of Regulation (EC) 1371/2007 on rail passengers' rights and obligations

8 Nov 2017

Passagerpulsen – The Passenger Watchdog at the Danish Consumer Council – has received the Recast of Regulation (EC) 1371/2007 on rail passengers' rights and obligations. We find it positive that the Commission want to make train passenger rights comparable to those of bus-, ferry- og airline passengers. Passenger rights should be unified and recognizable across transport modes when applicable. We also find it positive that the rights of disabled passengers are being strengthened. We have further comments on through ticketing and passenger rights for compensation when a delay or cancellation occurs. Our entire commenting can be found in the enclosed document (in Danish). On behalf of Passagerpulsen Lars Wiinblad Head of Research
Read full response