2454 final report.pdf - Agra CEAS Consulting

Evaluation of the Community Plant Health Regime: Final Report
DG SANCO Evaluation Framework Contract Lot 3 (Food Chain)
Payments made from public funds in order to cover all or part of the costs of the
measures of (a) and (b), except those related to the running costs of the competent
official body;
Payments made from public funds in order to compensate for all or part of the financial
losses other than loss of earnings resulting from the measures described in (c).
Therefore the cost for growers whose plant material is destroyed is not compensated, although
a possibility to cover such costs has been inserted but the implementing Regulation has never
been developed.
A minimum threshold of €25,000 exists for the eligible costs 230 .
The majority of CAs and stakeholders consulted for the purpose of this evaluation – in
common with the feedback received during the Solidarity Regime evaluation - consider that
the EU financial contribution does not sufficiently address the appropriate issues in the most
efficient way.
During the solidarity regime evaluation, the majority of MS CAs agreed that it is a sound
instrument whose underlying principles aspire to promote efficient and effective outcomes,
i.e. timely notification of the outbreak, taking all necessary eradication measures, introduction
of the dossier at the latest before the end of the calendar year following that in which the
appearance of the HO was detected, maximum duration, maximum Community contribution
of 50%, one dossier for eradication measures per year, degressivity rule. The current rate of
compensation was also considered to provide a proper balance between MS and Community
cost sharing.
Nevertheless, the contribution of the solidarity regime to the overall objective of protecting
and raising the health status of plants in the Community is considered to be limited because:
1) The scope of action is relatively narrow. Some outbreaks currently not eligible for
solidarity funding may have significance for the entire Community and the action taken
by the first MS could prevent the spread of the HO to the neighbouring MS; and,
2) All HOs are eligible for funding and all dossiers receive the same contribution in
percentage. The solidarity regime does not use any prioritisation mechanism as a means
of better targeting its resources where risks are greatest.
The incentives that the solidarity regime represents remain relatively limited for the following
reasons:
The solidarity regime is mainly an instrument of reimbursement a posteriori with
reduced possibility for intervention at the time of appearance of the HO;
Solidarity funding is allocated to cover the phytosanitary costs of an outbreak for which
the MS is not responsible (i.e. MS is the victim of the emergence of an HO). However,
230 According to Art. 4(3) of Commission Reg. No 1040/2002/EC, as amended by Commission Reg. No
738/2005/EC, the financial contribution from the Community shall not be granted where the total amount of
eligible expenditure per year is less than € 25,000.
Food Chain Evaluation Consortium 245