Considerations on COM(2024)53 - Equivalence of field inspections carried out in third countries on seed-producing crops and on the equivalence of seed produced in third countries (codification) - Main contents
Please note
This page contains a limited version of this dossier in the EU Monitor.
| dossier | COM(2024)53 - Equivalence of field inspections carried out in third countries on seed-producing crops and on the equivalence of seed ... |
|---|---|
| document | COM(2024)53 |
| date | February 6, 2024 |
(1) Council Decision 2003/17/EC6 has been substantially amended several times7. In the interests of clarity and rationality, that Decision should be codified.
🡻 2022/871 recital 1 (adapted)
(2) Council Decision 2003/17/EC8 provides that, uUnder certain conditions, field inspections carried out on certain seed-producing crops in the ⌦ certain ⌫ third countries listed in Annex I to that Decision are to ⌦ should ⌫ be considered equivalent to field inspections carried out in accordance with Union law. It also provides that, uUnder certain conditions, seed of certain species produced in those third countries is to ⌦ should ⌫ be considered equivalent to seed produced in accordance with Union law.
🡻 2022/871 recital 2 (adapted)
(3) Equivalence has been granted to ⌦ certain ⌫ those third countries by relying on the multilateral framework for international trade of seeds, namely the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) Seed Schemes for the Varietal Certification of Seed moving in International Trade and the methods of the International Seed Testing Association (ISTA) or, where appropriate, the rules of the Association of Official Seed Analysts ⌦ (AOSA) ⌫ that are equivalent to the ISTA methods. The Commission has also carried out legislative assessments and audits in some of those third countries in order to verify whether they meet the requirements under Union law before granting equivalence for the first time. Annual testing and reporting within the OECD framework, periodical re-auditing of laboratories for ISTA accreditation, as well as official inspections in the context of Union law, indicate that field inspections carried out in those third countries continue to afford the same guarantees as field inspections carried out by Member States and that seed produced and certified in those third countries continues to afford ⌦ s ⌫ the same guarantees as seed produced and certified in Member States. Those field inspections and seed should therefore continue to be considered equivalent to Union field inspections and seed.
🡻 2003/17/EC recital 7 (adapted)
(4) It is appropriate to include in this Decision specific rules concerning relabelling and refastening in the ⌦ Union ⌫ Community incorporating rules similar to those provided by Decision 86/110/EEC9, which is no longer applicable.
🡻 2003/17/EC recital 8 (adapted)
(5) The existing legislation already provides for an obligation for seed, including not finally certified seed, marketed in the Community to indicate whether the seed is chemically treated or the variety has been genetically modified. It is appropriate to provide for detailed rules on the exact indications to be given on the label of certified seed imported under this Decision ⌦ with regard to the obligation for seed, including not finally certified seed, marketed in the Union to indicate whether the seed is chemically treated or if the variety has been genetically modified ⌫. It is appropriate for these rules to mirror the ones provided by Decision 95/514/EC. It will be appropriate iIn ⌦ the ⌫ future, to update the Aannexes to this Decision ⌦ should be updated ⌫ in order to ensure that imported seed is subject to requirements equivalent to any new rules which may be introduced, especially for not finally certified seed,.