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)
The identified inconsistencies refer to:
Generally, the listing of organisms in two sets of legislation, i.e. the "quarantine"
organisms in the plant health legislation and the "quality" organisms in the S&PM
legislation;
The listing of some specific organisms in both sets of legislation, i.e. Synchytrium
endobioticum and Pseudomonas solanacearum;
The unclear position of RNQPs;
The co-existence of marketing standards for certificates and plant passports;
The conducting of separate inspections for certification and for plant health purposes;
The existence of two certification schemes for fruit plants, i.e. certification of fruit
plants according to Article 4(b) of Directive 2008/90/EC and according to Articles 15
and 16 in Annex IV.A.II of Directive 2000/29/EC, where reference is made to a
certification scheme. In the market place these two schemes are relevant for the same
businesses (private operators do not in practice make the distinction between the two
pieces of legislation).
The evaluation of the Community legislation on the marketing of S&PM carried out by FCEC
in 2008 had highlighted additional inconsistencies between the two sets of legislation, as
follows:
Concerning flower bulbs, the requirements of Directives 98/56 and 2000/29/EC differ
on some points for the same crops;
Concerning vegetable plants, producers of the plants from seed must guarantee that the
plant produced is pathogen free whereas this obligation does not apply to the seeds he
used to produce the plant;
Directive 2002/56 on the marketing of seed potatoes allows the transport of Farm Saved
Seed (FSS) (potatoes intended for planting but for own use) from one production site to
another without the obligation to certify these. However, the plant health Directive
2000/29/EC requires that the transport of potatoes intended for planting (certified and
uncertified, so including FSS) from one production site to another should be
accompanied by a plant passport, and this should be controlled by the authorities;
The fact that responsibilities for the implementation of the S&PM marketing Directives
and the plant health Directive are split over different authorities, leads to inefficiencies
in inspections and sometimes contradictory approaches. For example, the S&PM
marketing Directives allow for delegation of inspections ‗under official supervision‘
whereas the plant health Directive does not allow this;
Seed potatoes officially certified on the basis of Directive 2002/56 should satisfy
minimum conditions as specified in Annex I and II of the Directive. A number of these
conditions are related to certain plant diseases. Seed potatoes used as FSS are in general
not officially inspected.
The same evaluation concludes that: “although no major inconsistencies are observed
between both sets of legislation, a much better consistency could be achieved quite easily on
topics such as registration, definitions, and documentation”.
Food Chain Evaluation Consortium 253