Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the "Proposal for a Council Directive amending Directives 66/401/EEC, 66/402/EEC and 66/403/EEC on the marketing of fodder plant seed, cereal seed and seed potatoes"
Date: 2001-07-12
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: cereals, fodder plant, marketing, potato, seed, seedling

17.9.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 260/39

Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Council Directive
amending Directives 66/401/EEC, 66/402/EEC and 66/403/EEC on the marketing of fodder plant
seed, cereal seed and seed potatoes’

(2001/C 260/07)

On 24 April 2001 the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, under Article 37
of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-mentioned proposal.

The Section for Agriculture, Rural Development and the Environment, which was responsible for
preparing the Committee’s work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 21 June 2001. The rapporteur
was Mr Scully.

At its 383rd plenary session of 11 and 12 July 2001 (meeting of 12 July 2001) the Economic and Social
Committee adopted the following opinion unanimously.

1.

Introduction

2.1.1.1.
as well as greater efficiency are recognised advantages.

A substantial saving in cost in relation to packing

Council Directive 66/401/EEC (1) on the marketing of
1.1.
fodder plant seed, Council Directive 66/402/EEC (2) on the
marketing of cereal seed and Council Directive 66/403/EEC on
the marketing of seed potatoes provide for the carrying out of
temporary experiments.

1.2.
The results of the experiments have already shown
that, marketing of seed in bulk to the final consumer under
specified conditions has no adverse effects on the quality of
seed.

1.3.
On the basis of the results of the experiments the
present proposal also amends Council Directive 66/403/EEC (3)
on the marketing of seed potatoes since the same conclusion
also applies to seeds of other plants including potato.

2.1.1.2.
packaging material must also be noted.

The environmental benefit of a reduction in waste

2.1.1.3.
Producers who use bulk marketing of certified seed
can therefore avail of these advantages to reduce costs. By
implication, producers who do not use bulk marketing may
be at a cost disadvantage. It is therefore possible for the larger
growers in Member States who obtain derogation under the
proposed changes, to use bulk handling of certified seed to
competitive advantage.

1.4.
Commission proposals to amend Article 10 of Direc-
tives 66/401/EEC, 66/402/EEC and 66/403/EEC relate to the
packaging and marketing of certified seed.

2.2. Quality control

The primary objective of the proposal

1.5.
is to allow
for derogation from the current packaging and labelling
requirements of Articles 8, 9 and 10 of Directives 66/401/EEC,
66/402/EEC and 66/403/EEC. This derogation will allow for
bulk marketing of certified seed.

2. General comments

2.1. Bulk marketing of seed

2.1.1.
advantages both on producers and growers.

The marketing of seed in bulk confers particular

The regulations governing production of Certified
2.2.1.
seed control the quality of the seed to be closed for marketing,
in respect of seed purity, trueness to type, germination capacity
and plant health. They are fundamental to the success of any
Certification protocol.

2.2.2.
Crop production and quality control criteria for the
production of crops for closing and marking as Basic seed,
Certified seed and Commercial seed are defined in Articles 2
to 7 of Directives 66/401/EEC, 66/402/EEC and 66/403/EEC.
These directives remain unchanged.

(1) OJ 125, 11.7.1966, p. 2298. Directive as last amended by

Directive 98/96/EC.

(2) OJ 125, 11.7.1966, p. 2309. Directive as last amended by

Directive 1999/54/EC.

(3) OJ 125, 11.7.1966, p. 2320. Directive as last amended by

Decision 1999/742/EC.

2.2.3.
Article 8 of Directives 66/401/EEC, 66/402/EEC
and 66/403/EEC state that packages must be sufficiently
homogeneous, closed, and marked for marketing. The pro-
posed amendment to Article 10 of these Directives allows for
a simplification of Article 8 to allow for bulk delivery of seed.

C 260/40

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

17.9.2001

2.2.4.
Delivery of seed in bulk under specified conditions
has been found not to affect the quality of delivered seed, in a
temporary experiment carried out between 1994 and 2000 in
six Member States (1).
In these test experiments the seed
containers from which the seed was to be marketed were
finally certified in accordance with Directives 66/401/EEC,
66/402/EEC and 66/403/EEC as appropriate. The containers
used by the final consumer into which the seed was delivered
were sampled and then closed.

2.3. Quality Assurance

2.3.1. C l o s i n g a n d s e a l i n g

2.3.1.1.
The closing, sealing and marking of a seedlot is an
important mechanism in controlling the authenticity of a
delivered seedlot or consignment and the integrity of the
certification system. It prevents deliberate or accidental inter-
ference in the certification process before delivery to the final
consumer.

Articles 8, 9 and 10 of Directives 66/401/EEC,
2.3.1.2.
66/402/EEC and 66/403/EEC provide that packages for mar-
keting are closed and marked in a manner that cannot be
interfered with, and an officially sealed label attached to the
package. Any change will have implications both in terms of
plant health, traceability and ultimately on the credibility of
the Seed Certification scheme.

2.4. Consumer confidence

Consumer confidence should not be affected where bulk
containers are closed, sealed and marked to conform to
Articles 9 and 10 of Directives 66/401/EEC, 66/402/EEC and
66/403/EEC.

2.5.

Plant health

The final sample may attest to the quality of the bulk delivery
in terms of trueness to type, purity of seed and germination,
as will any certification process carried out on the crop grown
from the delivered seed.

2.6. Traceability

Official sealing of labels to the package for marketing as
in Article 10 of Directives 66/401/EEC,
provided for
66/402/EEC and 66/403/EEC, created a transparent and
traceable protocol.

3. Specific comments

3.1.
Since the relative advantage is obtained by way of
derogation received by a Member State from a Council
Directive, it could be inferred that the granting of a derogation,
to a Member State, confers an unfair trade advantage on some
producers in that Member State.

All Member States can apply for derogation, however
3.1.1.
the proportion of producers within a Member State who can
avail of bulk marketing will vary considerably from State to
State. Thus the competitive advantage may inadvertently be
transferred to a Member State by virtue of its capacity to
market seed in bulk. This will depend on the extent of bulk
marketing of Certified seed between Member States. It is not
clear if this derogation allows a producer in one Member State
to deliver in bulk to a final consumer in another Member State.
Should this occur, the ESC would invite the Commission to
clarify whether both Member States need to have derogation.

Article 8 makes no reference to the size of a seedlot
3.2.
closed for marketing, furthermore there is no biological or
physiological reason why a marked seedlot should be of a
particular size, other than that it is homogeneous in nature.

3.2.1.
The size of a closed seedlot or consignment for
marking should have no effect on the level of infective material
in the seedlot nor on the level of purity and trueness to type
of the seed, since these factors are governed by quality control
procedures prior to and at closing.

3.2.2.
The size of the closed seedlot or consignment for
marking should not cause to occur any change in the rate of
deterioration of a closed consignment provided that the closed
consignment is stored in accordance with correct storage
conditions and environment for that category of seed.

The ESC sees the need for further assurances as to how
3.3.
a simplified system, which might imply that the bulk container
is not necessarily sealed, guarantee the authenticity of the
certified seed on delivery.

3.3.1.
To address this issue, Article 2(e) of the test experi-
ment provides for final sampling of the container used by the
final consumer.

(1) Report of the Temporary Experiment on the Marketing of Seed in
Bulk to the Final Consumer (Commission Decision 94/650/EEC,
9.9.1994).

3.3.1.1.
This provision effectively delays the final sampling
and closing of seed consignments until after transfer to the
final consumer (although final certification occurs before
delivery).

17.9.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 260/41

3.3.1.2.
The status of this final sampling is not clear should
a difference arise between this sample and the final certification
prior to delivery. In the event of a discrepancy a protocol
should be agreed to resolve this issue.

3.3.1.3.
Any interference after final certification of the bulk
consignment should be manifest in the final random sample
after delivery. The accuracy and reliability of this final sample
will need to be as secure as that used prior to sealing any
conventional package for marketing of certified seed.

3.4.
The absence of specific criteria for hygiene, closing and
sealing of bulk delivery containers may have implications for
plant health in view of the fact that bulk containers may be re-
used. Containers will need to be certified free of contamination
from harmful organisms and be closed in a manner that will
not allow accidental contamination in transit to the final
consumer. The certification authority will need to be confident
that certified seed delivered in bulk will be as certified on any
plant health label associated with the delivery label.

3.4.1.
A procedure with no obligation to attach an official
label to a bulk delivery in a manner that cannot be interfered
with may diminish confidence and traceability in the Certifi-
cation Scheme, especially where the bulk delivery is not sealed.

The ESC supports a provision in Article 2(d) of the test
3.5.
experiment that the seed be marketed directly to the final
consumer. This will reduce the risk of accidental or deliberate
interference in the consignment and of incidental discrep-
ancies.

3.5.1.
However, the provision for marketing directly to
the final consumer, as well as notification to appropriate
certification authority of quantities of seed marketed in bulk
as provided for in Article 2 of the test experiment, may offer
some, but not complete, security with regard to certification
and traceability.

Brussels, 12 July 2001.

3.5.2.
It needs to be clarified whether the final consumer
(farmer) can offer seed delivered in bulk for re-sale. Further
clarification is needed on whether it is intended that the ‘final
consumer’ is one who only produces a crop from the delivered
seed.

3.5.2.1.
It is not clear if more than one ‘final consumer’ can
receive seed from the same bulk consignment. This has
implications for both disease transfer and traceability.

3.5.2.2.

Legal guarantee

A clear legal framework will have to be established so that, in
the event of damage occurring due to bad seed quality or
mishandling,
the farmer knows precisely which body is
responsible for the damage caused in terms of either direct
damage or lost profits, with a view to making a legal claim for
compensation.

3.5.2.2.1.
The body against which the farmer can instigate
legal proceedings must always be the one which produces the
seed and is responsible for its certification, i.e. the first link in
the chain; this body can in turn also take action against the
other bodies in the chain.

4. Conclusions

The final consumers’ confidence in the quality of the
4.1.
delivered seed will be conditioned by the assurance that the
seed delivered has been officially closed and sealed and
accurately labelled. Seed delivered in bulk and not deemed to
be closed and sealed may give rise to a less secure Certification
protocol.

4.2. Member States will need to be confident that simplifi-
cation of the closing and marking of seed for marketing will
not diminish the confidence producers have in the Seed
Certification Scheme and will not create a competitive advan-
tage for some producers. Measures will also need to be in
harmony with international trade provisions for the marketing
of Certified seed.

4.3.
In conclusion, having regard to the above-mentioned
remarks, the Committee is ready to support the present
Commission proposal.

The President

of the Economic and Social Committee

Göke FRERICHS