Friuli Venezia Giulia Regional Assembly

ELEVENTH LEGISLATIVE TERM

FIFTH STANDING COMMITTEE

(Institutional and statutory affairs, forms of government, elections, organisation of referendums, local and regional authorities, rights of common, external relations and relations with the European Union, monitoring bodies, cultural heritage and activities, linguistic identities, performances and events, leisure and sports activities and regional counterparts in other countries)

RESOLUTION No 1

On the proposal of the European Parliament and of the Council for a Regulation on organic production and labelling of organic products, amending Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX of the European Parliament and of the Council [Official Controls Regulation] and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 – COM(2014) 180 final

Comments within the meaning of Articles 25 and 24(3) of Law No 234/2012 and Protocol No 2 annexed to the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

Adopted at the session held on 14 May 2014

***

RESOLUTION

The Fifth Committee of the Autonomous Region of Friuli Venezia Giulia

[…]

A) makes the following comments:

a)The proposal for a regulation respects the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality in that the objectives, consisting in particular of guaranteeing fair competition and a well-functioning internal market in organic products and maintaining consumer confidence in these products and in the organic production logo of the European Union, cannot be adequately achieved by the Member States themselves but would be better achieved at EU level. In terms of the principle of proportionality, the proposed regulation does not go beyond what is necessary order to achieve these objectives.

b)With regard to the substance:

It is necessary to promote and preserve local Italian characteristics, and efforts to harmonise rules at European level should not be to the detriment of the special features of organic production in the Region.

Excessive use is made of delegated acts, which weaken the system and in some areas make it incomplete and inadequate. These acts should be carefully reviewed by the Member States. The real risk of using delegated acts is that the outcome may be at variance with policy guidelines.

It is considered appropriate that the regulation should cover mass catering. The Regulation in fact states, in Recital 12, that measures taken by Member States and private schemes in this area are considered adequate to ensure the functioning of the single market.

There is some concern regarding the provision whereby, after an appropriate conversion period, all mixed agricultural holdings in the Union which aim to become organic should be entirely managed in compliance with the requirements applicable to organic production. It will be difficult to implement this provision and it would be important, in view of the characteristics of our Region, to have the option of fully converting only a few sectors or at least excluding from this obligation those agricultural holdings where the sites of the logistical, operational and functional units are separated adequately.

The limit on the number of kg of nitrogen used per hectare, aimed at preventing natural resources such as the soil and water from being polluted by nutrients, should be extended to include not only livestock manure but also all authorised fertilisers containing nitrogen (Recital 24 and Annex II - Part I,Article 1.5.4.).

It would seem appropriate to extend the ban on hydroponic production to all non soil-based production processes.

It would be appropriate to include positive lists of authorised products particularly regarding processed of food and feed, as provided for under the regulation currently in force (Annex II - Part IV of the proposed Regulation).

The provision whereby only surplus organic manure from other organic agricultural holdings can be used is considered excessive, as it risks placing too great a burden on the holdings themselves; as regards the supply of manure, a vital resource for an organic farm, the origin should be defined in a specific ministerial decree as stipulated by the Ministry of Agricultural, Food and Forestry Policies (MIPAAF) (Annex II - Part I, Article 1.5.5.).

The criteria regulating controls need to be defined more precisely, in particular where the proposed Regulation reinforces the risk-based approach to official controls and removes the annual compliance controls on all operators provided for in Regulation (EC) No 834/2007, allowing for the frequency of controls to be adjusted, by means of delegated acts, which means that physical inspections of operators with a low-risk profile can be less frequent (at intervals of more than one year) and/or less comprehensive, whereas higher-risk operators will be subject to more targeted controls.

Recital 51 requires farmers to take suitable measures to prevent the risk of contamination by non-authorised products or substances. Where the unintentional presence of such products is found, Member States may, with the prior authorisation of the Commission, grant payments to compensate for losses in such instances. In this respect, however, it would be advisable to provide for the possibility of claiming damages from the person responsible, in line with the polluter-pays-principle.

Limits should be provided to differentiate between "organic" and "wholefood" products.

To assist agricultural holdings undergoing conversion or new organic holdings and to avoid penalising those switching over, upper limits should be established for the presence of in-conversion products-ingredients to ensure that the final product can in any event be certified as organic.

Given that certification is an essential instrument for entering large-scale retail chains and developing exports, group certification is undoubtedly a useful way of keeping costs down, especially for small-scale producers and distributors (operating, for example, in the Region's upland areas); nevertheless, the wording of the Regulation on this point is too restrictive and limiting.

B)requires that this resolution be sent to the Senate of the Republic and to the Chamber of Deputies in order to provide an opinion in accordance with Protocol No 2 on the Application of the Principles of Subsidiarity and Proportionality, within the meaning of Article 25 of Law No 234 of 2012, and to contribute to the framing of the Chambers' documents in the context of participation in the political dialogue with the institutions of the European Union within the meaning of Article 9 of Law No 234 of 2014;

C)requires that this resolution be sent to the President of the Region for the purposes set out in Article 24(3) of Law No 234/2012;

D)calls on the Regional Government to inform the Regional Assembly, within the meaning of Article 17(2) of Regional Law No 17 of 18 June 2007, of the follow-up to comments on the proposal under consideration and of any positions taken by the Region at European and national levels, with particular attention to those taken within the Conference of Regions and Autonomous Provinces, and of any subsequent contributions made by the Region to the European decision-making process;

E)also requires that this resolution be sent to the Conference of Presidents of the Legislative Assemblies of the Regions and Autonomous Provinces, within the meaning of Article 25 of Law No 234 of 2014 and, so as to maximise dissemination of information on upstream participatory activities, to Friuli Venezia Giulia's MEPs, to the subsidiarity network of the Committee of the Regions, to the European and Italian regional legislative assemblies and to the Conference of Presidents of the Regional Legislative Parliaments of the European Union (CALRE).

Unanimously approved at the session of 14 May 2014, in accordance with Article 170 of the Rules of Procedure.

COR-2014-03155-00-00-INFO (IT) 1/3