Brussels, 16/03/2015 (Agence Europe) - On Monday 16 March, the European agriculture ministers made progress on the 'import' plank of the regulation on organic products.
The Agriculture Council is still as divided, whilst on the aspect of unauthorised substances (pesticides), the British idea and/or Latvian compromise text received a certain amount of support, although there are still many technical issues to be resolved.
Austria and the Netherlands again called on the European Commission to present a new proposal, as they have many criticisms of the main elements of the proposed compromise of the Latvian Presidency of the Council. In the other camp, certain countries, such as France, have expressed optimism about the chances of wrapping the dossier up in May. “I firmly believe that an agreement can be reached”, said the French minister, Stephane Le Foll. Germany stressed the need for an evolution of the rules, “not a revolution”.
The Latvian Presidency noted the progress made and expressed hopes that the Council would be able to adopt a general approach at the Agriculture Council of May. In its working programme for 2015, the Commission plans to withdraw the text on organics if no agreement can be reached by the end of June of this year. The vote of the committee on agriculture of the EP is scheduled for late May.
Unauthorised substances. In the compromise text on unauthorised substances (article 20) submitted by the Latvian Presidency, the Commission is called upon to draft an act in which it clarifies the harmonised investigation rules in the event of the presence of banned pesticides. In the event of contamination, there would be an investigation, possibly leading to declassification.
A British position, which has the support of a number of delegations (France, Germany, Luxembourg, Finland, Estonia, Poland, Spain, Malta and Romania), calls for a harmonised approach at EU level, and rules on the causes of contamination and proportionate measures to be taken.
During the debate at the Council, a handful of countries, such as France and Ireland, stressed the need to focus on the objective of harmonising investigative practices and the follow-up actions to these. “The principle of proportionality should be built into the sanctions” should an operator fail to comply with the obligations, said France. Paris argues that the question of thresholds could be tackled once this first step has been implemented (the country also called for a review clause on this subject).
In the opposite corner, other countries (Italy, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Bulgaria, Slovenia, Cyprus, and others), and the Commission, feel that the implementation of a threshold is necessary and that it is impossible to label any product which may contain banned substances as 'organic'.
Imports from third countries. A Council majority seems to be emerging in favour of the Latvian Presidency's proposal for a transition period of five years (until 2022) to move from an equivalence regime to one based on compliance. Countries such as Denmark, the Netherlands and Sweden reiterated their preference to keep in place an equivalence regime, in order to avoid any interruptions of supply and the problems which may be encountered by the developing countries in selling their organic products within the EU.
Controls. The Presidency's proposed compromise regarding the control system applicable to organic farming was seen by many countries to be a step forward (maintaining annual controls, without specifying whether these will be controls on the ground). However, a group of countries (France, Germany, Italy, Portugal, Romania, Bulgaria, Denmark and others) called for the continued obligation of at least one physical check on the ground to be carried out at each holding in the organic sector.
The other subjects of the regulation on organic products include: the question of mixed products (a number of technical details to be finalised), the inclusion of salt and wood on the list of organic products, certification for operator groups, the conversion period and the dehorning of cattle, a derogation for the renewal rate of apiaries (in the event of high bee mortality).
Phil Hogan, the European commissioner for agriculture, noted that the member states “have worked hard” since December. For the attention of Austria in particular, Hogan said: “I am not going to withdraw the proposal”. The commissioner added that further work should be carried out on some of the suggestions made by the delegations on Monday. (Lionel Changeur)