6847/14
COM(2014) 82
EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM ON A EUROPEAN UNION DOCUMENT
Document 6847/14 of 21 February 2104 concerning a Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the establishment of a European fund for minor uses in the field of plant protection products
Submitted by the Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs
March 2014
SUBJECT MATTER
1.The report concerns a Commission proposal to financea small EU unit to coordinate Member States’ activities to increase the availability of plant protection products (agricultural pesticides) for minor uses. Minor pesticide use includesthe deployment of pesticides to protect low-acreage (largely horticultural) crops and to tackle less common pests, diseases and weeds in major crops. Minor uses are generally uneconomic for the crop protection industry to develop but are important for growers.
MINISTERIAL RESPONSIBILITY
2.Responsibility lies with the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Scottish Ministers, Welsh Ministers and Northern Ireland Executive Ministers. The Devolved Administrations have been consulted in the preparation of this Explanatory Memorandum.
LEGISLATIVE PROCEDURES
3.
- Legal base:
- Article 76 of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliamentand Council.
- Legislative procedure:
- Not applicable, provided the fund is used by the Commission for the purposes set out in Article 76.
- Voting procedure:
- Not applicable.
- Impact on UK law:
- None.
- Application to Gibraltar:
- Regulation 1107/2009 is applicable.
- Fundamental rights analysis:
- No fundamental rights issues arise from this document.
EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AREA
4.No EEA issues arise.
SUBSIDIARITY
5.No subsidiarity issues arise. The proposal does not remove the ability of Member States to carry out their own activities on minor uses. It simply offers a mechanism for co-ordination of areas of common concern.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
6.The costs of developing new pesticide products for agriculture are very high. Current estimates put the costs of research and development for a new ‘active substance’ for use in pesticide products at around €250 million. These costs may be recovered through worldwide sales and sales of products designed to treat a range of crops. However, formulating products for a particular market and for particular crops increases these development costs. It can be uneconomic for companies to develop products for minor uses.
Minor uses chiefly involve minor crops which, although individually grown on a relatively small scale, collectively are valued at €70 billion per year within the European Union. It is estimated that crop losses and additional growing costs arising from the lack of effective pesticides for minor crops cost around €1 billion per year.
The majority of Member States have national measures in place to support the development of pesticides for minor uses. These include support for research and development and for trials to secure the approval of new products. The total amount spend by Member States is estimated at around €8 million per year. In the UK these activities are funded by the Horticultural Development Company through a levy on growers’ production. At the moment these national support activities are only loosely coordinated at EU level.
Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 regulates the authorisation and marketing of plant protection products. It contains a number of provisions to support minor uses including extending the period of ‘data protection’ available for new products if they are designed for use on minor crops. The Regulation also requires the Commission to report on the case for establishing a European Fund for minor uses.
The Commission appointed consultants to undertake a study to inform that report which considered four options as follows:
1) No funding by the Commission;
2) Funding of a coordinating group of Member States (cost €40,000/year converted to £32,856in line with the exchange rate advised by Cabinet Office in March 2014);
3) Commission part-funding a central secretariat to coordinate Member State and other stakeholder activities (cost €500,000 to €700,000 per year, equivalent to £410,700 to £574,980/year); and
4) Commission funding the secretariat and some specific R&D projects (cost €1.2m to €6.0m/year, equivalent to £985,680 to £4,928,400 per year).
The Commission proposes that option 3 should be pursued. A technical secretariat of two full time equivalents would be established outside the Commission. The secretariat would coordinate minor uses work being undertaken by individual Member States, develop a database on minor uses and undertake other related activities. It would report to a steering committee of Member States, the Commission and any other co-funding stakeholders.
The UK Government supports the Commission’s proposal to pursue option 3. There is a good case for a small amount of additional EU funding to ensure more effective coordination of national initiatives to secure better utilisation of the resources already available from Member States. The Government does not believe that option 4 is justified at this time, given the need to restrain EU funding. The Commission has concluded, in any case, that option 4 would require new legislation which is not realistic in the short or medium term.
IMPACT ASSESSMENT
7.A full impact assessment is not required as there are no significant impacts on business or new financial burdens arising from setting up the proposed coordinating secretariat.
The cost of supporting the secretariat is estimated at €0.5-0.7 million per year to be shared between the Commission and Member States. The Commission has indicated that it will make €0.35m available. The benefits of the proposal cannot be quantified precisely but the Commission’s report notes that an equivalent but far more substantial programme in the USA (which has a federal budget of €8 million per year plus State and industry funding) resulted in 550 new authorisations over a 3.5 year period. Since the production of fruit and vegetables is greatest in Southern Europe (72% of production) the greatest benefit is likely to go to these Member States.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
8.The Commission has indicated that the funding it will provide will be found from within existing budgetary provision. UK Government support is likely to be confined to contributions in kind through technical support, which will be met by existing budgets.
CONSULTATION
9.The consultants appointed by the Commission undertook a wide ranging consultation of Member States and stakeholders, including UK stakeholders, in the course of compiling their report. There was overwhelming support for some form of body to coordinate EU minor use activities (96% of respondents). Within this group representatives of Member States generally supported option 3 whilst growers and the plant protection industry supported option 4. A further limited consultation of those UK stakeholders most directly affected by the Commission’s proposal has also been undertaken. This confirmed the overwhelming support for some strengthening of EU support for minor uses and the preference for option 4 amongst grower interests.
TIMETABLE
11.There is no timetable set so far. However, the Greek Presidency has indicated that it expects discussion of the Commission’s proposal in Council to begin in March.
Lord de Mauley
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Natural Environment and Science
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
PARLIAMENTARY SCRUTINY HISTORY RELEVANT TO A:
Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the establishment of a European fund for minor uses in the field of plant protection products
EM NO /Title: 10726/13 and 1, 2 Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL laying down provisions for the management of expenditure relating to the food chain, animal health and animal welfare, and relating to plant health and plant reproductive material, amending Council Directives 98/56/EC, 2000/29/EC and 2008/90/EC, Regulations (EC) No 178/2002, (EC) No 882/2004 and (EC) No 396/2005, Directive 2009/128/EC and Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 and repealing Council Decisions 66/399/EEC, 76/894/EEC and 2009/470/EC
Commission Staff Working Document - Impact Assessment Accompanying the document: Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL laying down general provisions for the management of expenditure in the field of food chain, animal health and welfare, and on plant health and plant reproductive material ("feed and food expenditure")
Commission Staff Working Document - Executive Summary of the Impact Assessment Accompanying the document Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL laying down provisions for the management of expenditure relating to the food chain, animal health and animal welfare, and relating to plant health and plant reproductive material, amending Council Directives 98/56/EC, 2000/29/EC and 2008/90/EC, Regulations (EC) No 178/2002, (EC) No 882/2004 and (EC) No 396/2005, Directive 2009/128/EC and Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 and repealing Council Decisions 66/399/EEC, 76/894/EEC and 2009/470/EC
Date EM signed:19/06/2013
Scrutiny Committees’ Recommendations:
Commons / LordsCleared as Politically important on 17-7-13 / Sifted to Sub Committee D at Chairman's Sift 1511 - 02/07/13
Cleared by letter on 10/10/13