08.11.2014 Views

2454 final report.pdf - Agra CEAS Consulting

2454 final report.pdf - Agra CEAS Consulting

2454 final report.pdf - Agra CEAS Consulting

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Evaluation of the Community Plant Health Regime: Final Report<br />

DG SANCO Evaluation Framework Contract Lot 3 (Food Chain)<br />

The survey revealed that both CAs and stakeholders 111 consider that the measures to deal with<br />

non-compliance imports are largely effective:<br />

General survey results<br />

Q3.1.j Extent to which the measures to deal with non-compliance have been effective in preventing the<br />

introduction of HOs into the Community:<br />

22 out of 26 MS CAs and 9 out of 21 stakeholders 111 consider that the measures to deal with non-compliance have<br />

been effective in preventing the introduction of HOs (1 MS CA and 11 stakeholders do not know).<br />

The large number of measures prescribed by the legislation in the case of non-compliance aims<br />

to provide a pragmatic solution for each specific case. The methodology for the physical control<br />

varies from one type of consignment to another and therefore the list of possible measures allows<br />

MS some flexibility to find the most appropriate solution.<br />

While this aim largely appears to be fulfilled, there is a risk that trade objectives may override<br />

plant health objectives in the process of deciding on the most appropriate measure. Some<br />

interviewees have mentioned that in several MS the least trade-restrictive measures are applied<br />

and these are not always the most effective ones from a plant health point of view. Decisions are<br />

taken in order to facilitate trade at the cost of plant health.<br />

One such area where problems occur is in the case of large bulk cargoes of e.g. fuel-wood. The<br />

inspection of such shipments is carried out after discharge and if non-compliance is observed<br />

through the visual check, it is too late to consider reloading the complete cargo; neither is it so<br />

simple to follow the requirements of the CPHR, for example destroying the contaminated<br />

consignment of wood.<br />

3.4.3 Cooperation with Customs systems and procedures<br />

This section covers issues of cooperation between the competent authorities for plant health and<br />

customs, as well as the consistency of existing nomenclature and interoperability of IT systems<br />

used in these two areas.<br />

Customs legislation applies to all entry and exit of goods into and from EU customs territory.<br />

This is without prejudice to specific rules laid down in specific fields, including plant health.<br />

This has practical implications: often customs services are the ones first faced with a situation,<br />

but in case of specific requirements on plant health it can be the phytosanitary inspection<br />

services.<br />

When a consignment arrives in the EU at a point of entry (PoE), its arrival is notified to the<br />

customs office of entry. Imports that arrive direct from a third country to a MS and that require<br />

the MS customs clearance must be accompanied by a Phytosanitary Certificate. These imports<br />

must be pre-notified to the Phytosanitary Inspectorate. The Inspectorate carries out a<br />

documentary check, once completed, the Inspector signs and stamps the Plant Health Movement<br />

Document. The identity and physical check of the consignments are carried out either at the PoE<br />

111 The large number of stakeholders that have responded ‗do not know‘ in this case may reflect the significant<br />

presence of non-traders amongst the stakeholders that responded to the survey. Of the 10 stakeholders that took a<br />

definite position on this question, 9 have indicated the system is effective.<br />

Food Chain Evaluation Consortium 93

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!