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)
to supplement or amend certain non-essential elements of a legislative act (‗delegated acts‘,
Art. 290) and to confer to the Commission powers to adopt implementing acts (Art. 291).
Those are subject to different legal frameworks 37 . The definition of the legal framework to
replace the comitology procedure established under the ECT (Art. 202) is currently on
going 38 and it is therefore not possible at the time of redaction of this report to elaborate on it.
It appears however that any revision of the Plant Health acquis would require adaptation to
these new comitology rules and would entail the need to scrutinize which kind of measures
previously adopted through the comitology rules set out in Commission Decision
1999/468/EC, falls into one or the other of the two concerned Articles of the TFUE [2] .
In terms of EU bilateral and international relations with third countries, at the level of the
European Commission several DGs are involved in SPS related issues, but the two main DGs
active in this field are DG TRADE and DG SANCO. The responsibilities of the two DGs are
distributed as follows:
DG SANCO covers imports and intra-Community trade and in the case of countries with
which bilateral agreements exist, DG SANCO covers all phytosanitary matters in trade
(i.e. also exports);
DG TRADE covers SPS issues in trade, with particular emphasis on EU exports (barriers
to EU exports). Exports are the responsibility of individual MS and DG TRADE provides
support to MS when trade issues emerge 39 .
The Commission (DG SANCO) may be assisted in negotiating and managing SPS agreements
with third countries by the MS through the Roosendaal Group(s) under the Working Party on
Plant Health 40 . These working groups are kept informed, where relevant, of developments in
the negotiations on export problems held in the framework of the WTO-SPS preparatory
37 The provisions on ‗delegated acts‘ (Art. 290), provide for the legislator to control the exercise of the
Commission‘s powers by means of a right of revocation and/or a right of objection. These provisions do not
require any legal binding framework to make them operational. The provisions on ‗implementing acts‘ (Art.291),
do not provide any role for the European Parliament and the Council to control the Commission‘s exercise of
implementing powers: such control can only be exercised by MS. A legal framework is required to establish the
mechanisms of such control.
38 As regards the implementation of Art.290, the Commission has set out its views on the scope of delegated
acts, the framework of delegation of power and the working methods it intends to use for preparing delegated
acts in a Communication to the EP and the Council (COM (2009) 673 of 9 December 2009). As regards the
implementation of Art.291, the Commission has submitted a proposal for a Regulation of the EP and the Council
laying down the rules and the general principles concerning mechanisms for control by MS of the Commission‘s
exercise of implementing powers (COM (2010) 83 final).
[2]
As regards the implementation of Art.290, the Commission has set out its views on the scope of delegated acts,
the framework of delegation of power and the working methods it intends to use for preparing delegated acts in a
Communication to the EP and the Council (COM (2009) 673 of 9 December 2009). As regards the
implementation of Art.291, the Commission has submitted a proposal for a Regulation of the EP and the Council
laying down the rules and the general principles concerning mechanisms for control by MS of the Commission‘s
exercise of implementing powers (COM (2010) 83 final).
39 Although DG TRADE is not directly involved in imports, it is important to demonstrate the system works
transparently and efficiently in the interest of reciprocity; when DG TRADE receives complains on EU import
issues from third countries, it provides the first point of contact for importers and then refers them to DG
SANCO.
40 There are 5 sub-groups within the Roosendaal Group covering the broad world geographic regions.
Food Chain Evaluation Consortium 35