OPINION OF THE COMMISSION pursuant to Article 251 (2) (c) of the EC Treaty, on the European Parliament's amendments to the Council's common position regarding the proposal for a DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL amending Directive 79/373/EEC on the marketing of compound feedingstuffs - AMENDING THE PROPOSAL OF THE COMMISSION pursuant to Article 250 (2) of the EC Treaty

EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM

Article 251 (2) (c) of the EC Treaty requires the Commission to deliver an opinion on the amendments proposed by the European Parliament at second reading.

The Commission's opinion on the seven amendments proposed by Parliament is set out in section 4.

1. Background

a) On 7 January 2000, the Commission submitted to the Council and to the European Parliament a proposal pursuant to Article 251 (2) and Article 152 of the EC Treaty (COM(1999) 744 final - 2000/0015 (COD)) amending Directive 79/373/EEC on the marketing of compound feedingstuffs [1].

[1] OJ L 86, 06.04.1979, p. 30.

b) The Economic and Social Committee delivered its opinion on 29 March 2000 [2].

[2] OJ C 140, 18.05.2000, p. 12.

c) On 13 September 2000, the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development adopted the zu Baringdorf report and approved the Commission's proposal subject to five amendments.

d) The European Parliament, at its plenary session of 2-6 October 2000, approved the Commission's proposal at first reading, subject to five amendments.

e) The Commission accepted four of the European Parliament's five amendments, which were then included in the amended proposal for a European Parliament and Council Directive adopted by the Commission on 21 December 2000 (COM(2000) 780 final).

f) The Council unanimously adopted its common position on 19 December 2000 [3]. The Council also accepted the European Parliament's four amendments accepted by the Commission in its modified proposal [4].

[3] OJ C 36, 02.02.2001, p. 35.

[4] However, one of these four amendments (No 5) relating to the date of implementation was not included in the common position as it was out of date.

g) On 5 April 2001, the European Parliament adopted at second reading a European legislative resolution on the common position of the Council, including seven amendments to that common position.

2. Purpose of the proposal

Directive 79/373/EEC on the marketing of compound feedingstuffs lays down rules on the labelling of compound feedingstuffs.

The purpose of the proposal is to ensure that stock farmers are informed about the composition of compound feedingstuffs, by imposing a compulsory declaration of detailed quantitative and qualitative information ("open declaration")

3. Common position

The common position is based on the following compromise:

- a compulsory declaration using five percentage bands covering the quantities of all feed materials;

- an obligation on the manufacturer to provide the open formula at the farmer's request.

4. Opinion of the Commission on the European Parliament's amendments at second reading

4.1. Amendments accepted by the Commission

NONE

4.2. Amendments not accepted by the Commission

* Amendment 1

This amendment imposes an exact declaration of the amounts of all ingredients in compound feedingstuffs for production animals.

Commission position

As regards safety, the important factor is the presence of an ingredient, and not necessarily its exact quantity.

The common position facilitates labelling by making a more flexible approach less difficult to enforce.

* Amendment 2

This amendment imposes an exact declaration of the amounts of all ingredients in compound feedingstuffs for production animals. The reference to the detailed list being provided "at the individual request of the stock farmer" is deleted.

Commission position

See justification relating to amendment 1

* Amendment 3

The reference to the exact composition being provided "voluntarily" by the manufacturer of compound feedingstuffs is also deleted.

Commission position

See justification relating to amendment 1

* Amendment 4

This amendment introduces a new recital calling on the Commission to put forward by the end of this year proposals for a positive list of feed materials.

Commission position

- This amendment does not relate to the provisions of Directive 79/373/EEC on the marketing of compound feedingstuffs, but to the provisions of Directive 96/25/EC on the circulation of feed materials for animal feedingstuffs.

- It is not realistic to ask the Commission to put forward by the end of this year proposals for a positive list of permissible feed materials for feedingstuffs. This could contain approximately 15 000 entries. In addition, this requirement for a positive list will not increase the safety of the products used, as a batch of products included in the list can, for instance, be very dangerous because of an accident.

- The Commission is, however, considering a feasibility study on this issue to be completed by the first half of 2002 at the latest.

* Amendment 5

This amendment imposes an exact declaration of the amounts of all ingredients in compound feedingstuffs for production animals.

Commission position

See justification relating to amendment 1.

* Amendment 6

This amendment imposes an exact declaration of the amounts of all ingredients in compound feedingstuffs for production animals, rather than using certain percentage bands as in the common position.

Commission position

See justification relating to amendment 1.

* Amendment 7

This amendment deletes the Annex laying down the percentage bands within which feed materials would be listed according to their percentages by weight.

Commission position

The Annex provides all the necessary information and the necessary degree of flexibility for feed business operators.

5. Conclusions

The Commission is not in agreement with any of the European Parliament's amendments to the common position.

The common position includes nearly all the amendments introduced by the European Parliament at first reading (only the amendment concerning the positive list of feed materials is not included, as it does not fall within the scope of the proposal). Furthermore, the common position ensures a level of safety equivalent to that of the original proposal.