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

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

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

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

including import into and movement through the Community as well as exports of consignments<br />

outside the Community. Such a system exists in animal health (TRACES 137 ). An equivalent<br />

system in plant health could allow the electronic preparation of PPs, the electronic issuing of<br />

plant health certificates and the tracing of consignments. This system has already been presented<br />

to the Standing Committee of Plant Health and received some interest from MS. However the<br />

major issue linked to the establishment of such a system is the cost and staff required for settingup<br />

and managing such a database, knowing that volumes of movements are much higher in plant<br />

health than animal health (this issue is discussed further in section 5.2).<br />

3.5.6 Implementation of exemptions<br />

3.5.6.1 Small producers for the local market<br />

Article 6(7) of Directive 2000/29/EC exempts small producers or processors whose entire<br />

production and sale of relevant products are intended for <strong>final</strong> usage on the local market and who<br />

are not professionally involved in plant production (local movement) from the requirements for<br />

the registration of establishments, therefore from the official inspections and from the need to<br />

issue PPs.<br />

The definitions of “small producers” and of “local market” are not established in the base<br />

Directive, but are left to the MS to decide on. Not all MS have established national rules to apply<br />

this potential exemption, as follows:<br />

Table 3-12: MS implementation of exemptions from certain PP provisions<br />

Type of exemption<br />

MS that have established national provisions on<br />

―small producers‖ and ―local market‖ to use<br />

exemption as defined in base Directive<br />

MS that have NOT established national provisions<br />

on ―small producers‖ and ―local market‖ to use<br />

exemption as defined in base Directive<br />

MS where applied<br />

SI, EE, DK, PT, FI, BE, UK, BG, IT, , DE, IE (wood<br />

material), MT, HU, RO, CZ, AT, PL, FR, EL<br />

CY, NL, SE, LT, ES, LV<br />

Source: FCEC, based on general survey results<br />

The analysis of national provisions shows that these are variable across MS and the interpretation<br />

of the term ―local market‖ also varies considerably between MS.<br />

The main reason indicated by MS for not implementing provisions to establish exemption is<br />

mainly the perception that these exemptions create a lack of clarity and make the system<br />

unnecessarily complex and less enforceable. Additionally, the risk of spread of HOs from a local<br />

market is not negligible. At the time of marketing, there is no full guarantee that the plant will be<br />

used only at the local market, Finally, when it comes to inspection, it is apparently confusing to<br />

137 TRACES allows the electronic exchange of intra-EU trade certificates and import documents between the CAs<br />

(customs and veterinary) in charge of animal health controls. Economic operators could be involved in drafting these<br />

documents.<br />

Food Chain Evaluation Consortium 123

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!