Activites

• 2005/03/16 Final act published in Official Journal
  • Regulation 2005/396
  • OJ L 070 16.03.2005, p. 0001-0016
• 2005/02/23 Final act signed
• 2005/02/23 End of procedure in Parliament
• #2635
• 2005/01/24 Council Meeting
• 2004/12/15 Results of vote in Parliament
  • Results of vote in Parliament
  • T6-0098/2004 summary

    The European Parliament adopted, by a large majority, a compromise package reached by the rapporteur, Robert STURDY (EPP-ED, UK), other political groups and the Council presidency on pesticide residues. The agreed text now places greater emphasis on consumer protection. The text states that the MRLs should be set at the lowest achievable level consistent with good agricultural practice for each pesticide with a view to protecting vulnerablegroups such as children and the unborn. In addition:- the definition of "good agricultural practice" implies the application, in conformity with Directive 91/414/EEC, of the principles of integrated pest control in a given climate zone, as well as using theminimum quantity of pesticides and setting MRLs/temporary MRLs at the lowest level which allows the desired effect to be obtained;- the concepts of an "acute reference dose" (the amount of a substance in food that can be ingested over a short time without appreciable risk to the consumer) and of "acceptable daily intake" (the amount of a substance that can be ingested daily over a lifetime) should take account of "the sensitive groups within the population (e.g. children and the unborn)".- To ensure that consumers are kept adequately informed, Member States should, in accordance with Regulation 882/2004/EC, publish the results of national monitoring residues annually on the internet, providing all individual data, including the place of collection and the names of retailers, trades and/or producers;- Parliament laid down new time limits on supplementary information;- Where MRLs are exceeded, Member States may name the retailers, traders or producers concerned.Finally, the compromise states that MRLs for imported commodities should not normally exceed the MRL limits set for domestic commodities. The deal reiterates a demand for a separate assessment for herbal infusions due to their many component parts.

• 2004/12/14 Debate in Parliament
  • Debate in Parliament
• 2004/11/29 Committee recommendation tabled for plenary, 2nd reading
  • A6-0049/2004
• 2004/11/24 Vote in committee, 2nd reading
• 2004/09/16 Committee referral announced in Parliament, 2nd reading
• #2599
• 2004/07/19 Council Meeting
  • 09262/1/2004 summary

    The Council's common, adopted by unanimity, broadly accords with the positions taken by the Commission and the Parliament. It confirms the objectives and most of the arrangements proposed by the Commission and supported by the European Parliament as well as including a large number of the amendments adopted at first reading by the European Parliament. Notably, the Council agreed with a series of parliamentary amendments aiming to ensure the smooth functioning of the new procedures and to increase consistency between the new Regulation and other Community legislation. In addition, the Council felt that it was appropriate to introduce further amendments, for example, to allow Member States the flexibility to deal with MRL exceedences that arise in certain exceptional cases. The Council also reordered and reformatted parts of the text of the Regulation so as to clarify the roles of the Member States, EFSA and the Commission and to separate transitional provisions from the standard procedures under the new regime.More specifically, the main amendments introduced by the Council concern the following issues :- Application Procedure: the Respective Roles of the EFSA and the Member States : although the Commission had foreseen an exclusive role for EFSA in scientific evaluation work and the setting of MRLs, the Council agreed with the Parliament that Member States should perform a preliminary analysis of MRL applications in line with established procedures under Directive 91/414/EEC. In addition, the Council agreed that a copy of MRL applications received by Member States should immediately be sent to the Commission and to EFSA.- Procedure for Routine Work Performed by EFSA : the Council introduced a new article designed to avoid unnecessary consultation of scientific bodies on matters of routine, i.e. in cases where EFSA issues opinions purely based on well established scientific principles.- Administrative Review : a new article was added with a view to providing a form of legal redressregarding decisions taken by EFSA and also in the event of non-action by EFSA.- Time Scale and Transition to the New Procedures : in order to ensure a smooth transition to the new provisions, the Council followed the Parliament in setting down specific deadlines for the completion of the principal technical annexes, which will set out a list of harmonised MRLs (Annex II), a list of harmonised temporary MRLs (Annex III), and a list of active substances for which no MRLs are required (Annex IV). In the same spirit, the Council also introduced a deadline for drawing up the annex listing the products to which harmonised MRLs will apply (Annex I). Like Parliament, the Council considered that the Regulation should not apply in full until after the crucial annexes havebeen drawn up.- Possibility to Extend the Validity of Temporary MRLs : in order to facilitate a smooth transition to a fully harmonised regime (e.g. where Member States indicate that extra time is required to complete scientific studies on substances that have been authorised nationally), the Council decided that itshould be possible for temporary MRLs, which will normally be valid for one year, to be maintained in Annex III for up to three additional years in certain cases.- The Use of Pesticides for Post-Harvest Treatment : a derogation was introduced in order to provide for the practice of post-harvest fumigation of products.- The Use of Pesticides in Exceptional Circumstances : in order to provide for exceptional circumstances, emergency provisions were introduced allowing a Member State to authorise the placing on the market and/or the feeding to animals within its territory of food or feed that is not in compliance with the MRLs laid down in the Regulation. Such authorisations are to be notified to the other Member States, the Commission and EFSA, with a view to setting temporary MRLs and taking any other necessary actions. Such authorisations can only be granted provided that the treated food or feed does not constitute an unacceptable risk to consumers.- Definitions : the Council added two new definitions, namely, "critical GAP" (i.e. the Good Agricultural Practice that forms the basis for a harmonised MRL under the Regulation) and "CXL" (i.e. an MRL set by the Codex Alimentarius Commission), and deleted the definition of "composite foodstuffs." In addition, the Council followed the European Parliament in clarifying the definition of "pesticide residues".Lastly, it should be noted that further discussion is needed, in particular, on issues associated with risk assessment, and on provisions concerning the use of plant protection products, where Council was unable to agree to a number of Parliament's amendments at this stage.Such items concern, in particular, approaches to exposure assessment in the context of MRL-setting, considerations surrounding the most appropriate way of providing information to the public, and the drafting of provisions concerning good agricultural practice and pest management.

• #2578
• 2004/04/26 Council Meeting
• 2004/04/20 Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
  • T5-0299/2004 summary

    The European Parliament adopted a resolution drafted by Robert STURDY (EPP-ED, UK), broadly backing the proposal. Parliament stated that the aim of the Regulation is to set harmonised maximum residue levels (MRLs) for pesticides in products of plant and animal origin in order to protect all European consumers against possible health effects. MRLs should therefore be set at the lowest reasonably achievable level with the aim of ensuring the best possible consumer protection, and with a view to protecting vulnerable groups such as children and the unborn, and in order to minimise possible combined effects of multiple residues. Aggregate MRLs should be set after consultation of the European Food Safety Authority, who will submit proposals for the calculation of aggregate MRLs. In addition: - Maximum Residue Level (MRL) is now defined as the upper legal level of concentration for a pesticide residue, based on the best available agricultural methods of crop protection, i.e. integrated pest management in a given climate zone, and the lowest consumer exposure necessary to protect all vulnerable consumers; if an MRL is exceeded, measures are to be taken to withdraw a product from the market; - the role of the Commission, Member States and the Authority are more tightly defined by the amendments. The Commission must have the final say in setting, modifying or deleting an MRL. Parliament lists a series of factors that must be taken into account before a decision is made; - Member States must, on a quarterly basis, publish all results of national residue monitoring on the Internet, providing all individual data. Where MRLs are exceeded, Member States may name the retailers, traders or producers concerned; - The annexes on the maximum safe amounts of pesticide residues have not been prepared and Parliament has set deadlines for their entry into force.�

• 2004/04/19 Debate in Parliament
  • Debate in Parliament
• 2004/04/06 Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
  • A5-0260/2004
• #2555
• 2003/12/18 Council Meeting
  • 2555
• #X019
• 2003/11/17 Council Meeting
• 2003/03/27 Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
• 2003/03/14 Legislative proposal published
  • COM(2003)0117 summary

    PURPOSE : to harmonise at the European level the maximum residue levels (MRLs) of pesticides permitted in products of plant and animal origin. CONTENT : the proposed draft Regulation of the European Parliament and the Council replaces the four Council Directives on Maximum Residue Levels (MRLs) for plant protection products. The primary objectives of the proposal are to consolidate and to simplify the existing legislation in this area and to define the roles of the different actors, particularly that of the EFSA in the process. To this end, existing legislation was examined in the fifth Simpler Legislation for the Internal Market (SLIM V) exercise of the Commission during 2001, the recommendations of which are incorporated in the proposal. A secondary objective is to solve existing practical, Single Market and third-country trade problems. The consequence of this draft Regulation entering into force will be that all MRLs for plant protection products will become harmonised after a transitional 'phase-in' period, and will thenceforth only be set at the European level. It removes all trade barriers that were the result of the current situation whereby Member States can set their own national MRLs in the absence of Community MRLs. It provides for the role of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) and of the Commission in the process of setting MRLs. Risk assessment will become a responsibility of EFSA acting with its network of experts and institutes in the Member States and where EFSA will have the responsibility for giving an opinion on the safety of each MRL. The Commission will be responsible for the risk management, by deciding on the setting of MRLs based on the opinion of EFSA. Member States authorities will provide EFSA with data on national diets, the authorisations and their agricultural practices. EFSA will base its opinions on assessments of these data, other data obtained in the process of evaluation of active substances under Directive 91/414/EEC and additional data to be supplied by applicants. MRLs not yet harmonised both for existing and new substances, previously set at the national level will be compiled by EFSA, screened for their safety based on the data available and set as temporary MRLs. These MRLs will be revisited on a substance-by-substance basis after the final conclusions on each of the 91/414/EEC evaluations. In all cases where there is no use of a pesticide on a commodity or when no data are available to demonstrate that residues do not endanger consumer health, no residues may be permitted at levels higher than 0.01 mg/kg which is an enforceable default for zero. Exceptions will be made for substances where a level of 0.01 is not safe for the consumer by setting MRLs at a lower level.�

  • DG [{'url': 'http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/health_consumer/index_en.htm', 'title': 'Health and Consumers'}],

Documents

• Legislative proposal published: COM(2003)0117
• Debate in Council: 2555
• Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading: A5-0260/2004
• Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
• Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading: T5-0299/2004
• Council position published: 09262/1/2004
• Committee recommendation tabled for plenary, 2nd reading: A6-0049/2004
• Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
• Results of vote in Parliament: Results of vote in Parliament
• Decision by Parliament, 2nd reading: T6-0098/2004
• : Regulation 2005/396
• : OJ L 070 16.03.2005, p. 0001-0016

History

(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)