Regulatory threats to seed exchanges and plant movements

[meanie]

Discussing this with someone on Friday night, I was told that as far as he knew, the British government have stated that they will refuse to implement this legislation if it comes to pass. Cannot find any official announcement to this end though.

So maybe it is time for us to lobby our local Green Party members in order to drum up some pressure in Westminster?

Question; Through an on-line contact I was lucky enough to receive a couple of Passiflora from Dr.Maurizio. One's a rare species and the other is one of his hybrids. The deal is that I report on hardiness. As I'm not an accredited organisation am I correct in saying that such an arrangement will make me a criminal in the future?

Another thought. If I'm on holiday, see something that I like (assuming that it is not a protected species) and collect ripe seed from it would this be illegal?

[Hillview croconut]

Hi,

I think the UK not adhering to the proposed regulatory changes is unlikely because of the potential economic loss but if Holland also was on board then that significantly changes things. I guess both could refuse to drop the "Commonly Known" descriptor. Now that would be interesting. And good on them if they did. Just on cost alone it is crazy to ditch this approach in favour of a unique descriptor.

As to the question of the criminality of receiving or collecting seeds? Well who knows? These are questions the SRGC and the AGS need to be asking on behalf of their members. Don't forget there appears to be some exemptions, for example, small businesses and botanical institutions but that doesn't cover conservation of varieties or the loss of cultural heritage adequately. Not does it pay attention to questions of civil liberty or local participation.

Where individuals stand in all this? Well who knows? In view of the fact that this is about business regulation probably nowhere. I don't think the EC has a position on such things. After all in this equation we are just consumers. My understanding is that if one doesn't trade then it doesn't count. But the ramifications depend on the definition of trade. Is the SRGC seed exchange a trading entity? That's a question the SRGC needs to be asking on behalf of its members.

Whether species are included within Annex 1? And if so, which ones, and why? Who knows? These are questions the SRGC needs to be asking on behalf of its members.

Cheers, Marcus

[ChrisB]

Here's the response from my MEP Fiona Hall:

Dear Ms. Boulby,

 

Thank you for your email regarding the revision of EU legislation on the marketing of seed and plant propagating material.

 

The proposal for a Regulation on the production and making available on the market of plant reproductive material is part of the European Commission’s package on health and safety standards of the agriculture-to-food chain which was announced on 6 May 2013. The Regulation aims to harmonise 12 existing Directives, but there is a lot of room for improvement on the Commission’s proposal.

 

There are a number of concerns, particularly regarding the potentially adverse effect this Regulation would have on gardeners, ornamental growers and businesses supplying niche markets. My Lib Dem colleague George Lyon MEP, who is a member of the European Parliament’s Agriculture Committee, wants to ensure that these sectors are able to continue operating and not face unnecessary administrative burdens as a result of this revised legislation.

 

George has been working closely with the UK Government and drawn up a number of amendments to the Committee’s report that exclude ornamental plants, home gardeners and businesses that serve niche markets from this proposed regulation. These were also co-signed by my Lib Dem colleague Chris Davies MEP who is a member of the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety Committee.

 

While we do need to ensure that the quality of the material bought is of a sufficient standard and that it is traceable, Lib Dem MEPs also believe that ornamental products and seeds sold in niche markets should fall out of the scope of this Regulation. We believe that there will be widespread support for these amendments when they are voted on in the Agriculture Committee. MEPs in the Agriculture Committee are expected to vote on the report and on proposed amendments early this year.

 

Thank you again for your email.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

 

Fiona Hall MEP

[Hillview croconut]

Thank God for common sense! Looks like the bulldozers will meet with a bit of resistance for a change.

All Good! And a great start to the New Year.

Thanks for sharing this.

Cheers, Marcus

[Maggi Young]

The SRGC stance on this legislation and a plea for members to become involved is on the main site.
Note from the President :

The Scottish Rock Garden Club joins many other gardening organisations in calling for changes to the proposed EU Plant Reproductive Material legislation.
The SRGC is highlighting that the proposed EU Plant Reproductive Material legislation, in its currently-drafted form is likely to have serious unintended consequences for rock gardeners and for the valuable exchange of seeds between individuals and clubs.

The draft legislation, which was said to be intended to improve consumer protection and allow businesses and amateurs to be sure that seed they are buying is true to the label, has raised comprehensive catch-all clauses which mean that ‘home garden’ seeds will be treated in the same way as the most widely-used commercial crops.

The SRGC wishes to raise awareness of the potential negative impacts of the proposed legislation that currently requires ‘breeders’ or sellers to pay a fee of between £300 and £500 to register each plant name.  With the thousands of wild species exchanged by seed exchanges, this cost would be totally prohibitive, lead to the loss of seed exchanges and potentially jeopardise ex-situ plant conservation projects. 

The SRGC suggests either that this proposed legislation should be rejected, or is amended to exempt non-commercial, amateur and ‘home garden’ seed from the regulations, as is the case in the existing legislation.  We suggest that members might like to write to their MEPs, and
a.   let them know that you are very worried by the proposed EU Plant Reproductive Material legislation.
b.   tell them that amateur gardeners should be able to choose any decorative plants they wish to grow in their own gardens (subject to national and/or international pest or conservation legislation), rather than from a list of 'EU-approved' species.
c.   explain that you should continue to be able to buy and exchange small packets of seed suitable for private gardeners, as opposed to seed for large-scale agriculture or horticulture.
d.   If the legislation were to persist, any plant species in the International Plant Nomenclature Index (IPNI) or any variety listed in the UK Royal Horticultural Society’s ‘Plant Finder’ should be considered to have an approved description and registered name.
e.   Ask them to ensure the draft legislation is amended to exempt amateur and non-commercial seed sales and exchanges.

The relevant MEPs within Scotland are
•   George Lyon
•   Struan Stevenson
•   Alyn Smith

As President, I am writing to the MEPs using the points raised in the attached, our members should do likewise.

Dr Carole Bainbridge
SRGC President

-------------------------------------------
For other MEPS in other countries:
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meps/en/map.html   
 
and those  closely involved in the relevant committees:

pilar.ayuso@europarl.europa.eu, martina.anderson@europarl.europa.eu, martin.callanan@europarl.europa.eu, chris@chrisdaviesmep.org.uk, jill.evans@europarl.europa.eu, nick.griffin@europarl.europa.eu, linda.mcavan@europarl.europa.eu, paul.nuttall@europarl.europa.eu, glenis.willmott@europarl.europa.eu, marina.yannakoudakis@europarl.europa.eu, godfrey.bloom@europarl.europa.eu, vicky.ford@europarl.europa.eu, jacqueline.foster@europarl.europa.eu, julie.girling@europarl.europa.eu, james.nicholson@europarl.europa.eu, struan.stevenson@europarl.europa.eu, rebecca.taylor@europarl.europa.eu, sergio.silvestris@europarl.europa.eu, johnstuart.agnew@europarl.europa.eu, diane.dodds@europarl.europa.eu, julie.girling@europarl.europa.eu, george.lyon@europarl.europa.eu, james.nicholson@europarl.europa.eu, alyn.smith@europarl.europa.eu, richard.ashworth@europarl.europa.eu, john.bufton@europarl.europa.eu, jill.evans@europarl.europa.eu, anthea.mcintyre@europarl.europa.eu, brian.simpson@europarl.europa.eu

[Hillview croconut]

Brilliant!

Please all SRGC members resident in the EU get behind this and write, even if its an exact copy of the SRGC's official stance on this matter!!

Cheers, Marcus

[ashley]

Following on from message #71 above, my MEP Mr Seán Kelly received this response from Commissioner Borg (attached). 
This suggests to me that activities like the SRGC seed exchange are not threatened in any way (?).  Rather the intention is to strengthen the rights of commercial customers across the EU.

Some gender reassignment happened along the way but in a good cause  
Je ne regrette rien.

[Hillview croconut]

Hi,  I don't quite read it that way. There is a lot of window dressing in the letter but it's very light on detail. Well does the SRGC qualify as an organization for the "conservation of genetic resources"? I think it's scope is broader than that.

While there is a "softened" approach to descriptors and labelling its still front and centre. And even though the letter states that requirements for ornamentals should be less budensome it then goes on to muddy the water by specifically referring to non-listed species/varieties I.e. those not listed in Annex 1).
What about Annex 1 listings?
And what level of description is required?
Have pre-existing registration/description lists been considered as perfectly adequate resource for descriptors?
BTW does anyone know what the qualifying criteria are for placement in Annex 1?
Are species to be placed on Annex 1. If so, why? And if so, why aren't their ALREADY published descriptions adequate?
Another problem I perceive is the adequate description of seed raised strains. Take hellebores. It is impossible to set strict limits on the range of shades in a strain of say, "Blue Lady" (straight out of Jelitto's recent catalogue). Does that mean these can't be marketed under the proposed regulations? Does that mean only flowering hybrid hellebores can be sold because thats the only way to achieve adherence to "the descriptor"?

By now we all should understand the purpose of the regulations. Mr Borg begins his letter with a very persuasive statement about  strengthening consumer choice. However its much more complex than just the commercial exchange between businesses and customers and I still don't believe that is being addressed sufficiently well enough.

[Hillview croconut]

PS I ran out of room on my tablet to put this last bit in.

Bureaucrats see the world as one big opportunity to be codified and organized according to their understanding of it. They are, afterall, just people like you and I, although I am now sure there is a gene for busybodiness, and they get very attached to their solutions. Dont be fooled by mothehood statements or soft, nice-sounding phrases like "ensure consumers' choices". All very well but don't let them "chuck the baby out with the bathwater" because I can guarantee once its out there will be no getting it back in.
Cheers, M

[Hillview croconut]

Hi again, some food for thought:

Janis Ruksans lists over 30 Corydalis solida cultivars on his current catalogue. Under the proposed regulations will he be required to register individual descriptions for each and every one with the EC before he can sell them in the EU? Or will he be lucky and find that the whole genus is not included in Annex 1? Or maybe C. solida IS and all the other species aren't?  Why is that? If that was the case who or what provides the legal decription for Corydalis solida? Will all of Janis' cultivars meet that descriptors requirements? If not, can he register them as vareties and avoid having to provide full descriptions for those that don't?

Will Janis' business be exempt from such torturous convolutions? Imagine the rigmarole!

So much for Mr Borg's nice sounding, "It is important that the marketing of ornamentals remains proportionate and less burdensome than for EU listed plant species". BUT HANG ON it just might be listed!

As I said previously take with a grain of salt sweet sounding motherhoods from those in charge.. The reality is always more complex and difficult questions need to keep on being asked.

Cheers, M

[Maggi Young]

Annex 1 is contained in pages 94-99 of the 147page document  listed earlier in this thread.
Here it is:
 Annex 1 from page 94 to 99.pdf (43.74 kB - downloaded 164 times.)

[Hillview croconut]

That's a relief! But is Janis still required to register these cultivars with full descriptions under the proposed regulations posited for ornamentals? Or can he just list them as varieties of the known species and thus require no more than the description he provides in his catalogue?

Cheers, Marcus

[Maggi Young]

One of the real difficulties as I see it is that already the "goal posts" have been changed  - e.g. the blanket exemption that was first included for smaller companies has been removed  - and  who knows what other changes might be included even before the act is finalised if those with a valid interest do not make their position clear to the officials?
If  our concerns are not expressed at this stage, there is little hope of any notice being taken of protests at a later date.

 It will be a case of  rearrange these words into a well known English phrase :

 has door the after bolted closing the horse stable ........ 

[Hillview croconut]

Yes, one can be sure that Brussells will want a nice all inclusive package if they can get away with it and that those on the other side of the table will be looking after their own interests. Small Business doesn't have a champion to puts case directly and has to rely on proxies. But if those who will be affected remain silent then,  as you say,  you can shut the gate.
I wonder what approach Evolution Plants, who have literally only just begun, and Cally Gardens are taking?

Cheers,  M

[Maggi Young]

A response received to an email yesterday by Derrick Donnison-Morgan  to this MEP :

Thank you for your further email about the EU Plant Reproductive Material Law.
 
The proposal for a Regulation on the production and making available on the market of plant reproductive material (COM(2013) 262) is part of the European Commission’s package on health and safety standards of the agriculture-to-food chain which was announced on 6th May last year. The aim of the proposal is to cut red tape for farmers and businesses whilst taking a more risk evidenced based approach to health.  A summary of the proposal is available here:http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/health_consumer/pressroom/docs/cs-plant-seeds_en.pdf and you can find more information as well as FAQs and impact assessments on this website: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/health_consumer/pressroom/animal-plant-health_en.htm.
 
The regulation aims to harmonise 12 existing directives, but there is a lot of room for improvement on the Commission’s proposal.  My Liberal Democrat Euro MP colleagues and I had a number of concerns, particularly regarding the potentially adverse effect this regulation would have on gardeners, ornamental growers and businesses supplying niche markets.  Therefore, we have tried to ensure that these sectors are able to continue operating and not face unnecessary administrative burdens.
 
In particular, my colleague George Lyon MEP, has worked closely with the UK Government and drawn up a number of amendments that exclude ornamental plants, home gardeners and businesses that serve niche markets from this proposed regulation.  While we do need to ensure that the quality of the material bought is of a sufficient standard and that it is traceable, I believe that ornamental products and seeds sold in niche markets should fall outside the scope of this regulation.
 
I understand the current position is there are nearly 1,500 amendments have been tabled in the Agricultural and Rural Development Committee, most of which deal with the concerns of gardeners and seed producers.  The Committee is provisionally scheduled to begin starting discussions on the amendments on 27th January 2014.
 
Thank you again for contacting me on this important issue.  My Liberal Democrat colleagues and I take your specific concerns very seriously and will follow these proposals closely during the on-going negotiations.
 
Yours sincerely,
 
 
Catherine Bearder MEP
 
Liberal Democrat member of the European Parliament for the South East of England
Constituency Office
27 Park End Street
Oxford
OX1 1HU
+44 1865 249838
www.bearder.eu