Base Legal. Decreto · Ley · Reglamento Base legal del Sistema de Transparencia. Ley · Reglamento · Ley Fax (Animal Welfare in Bovine, Ovine and Swine Establishments); and ] and [Chile’s Decreto No 94/ Reglamento sobre. 76  – Decree “Rules of Procedure on Labor Relations,” the.
|Published (Last):||10 December 2011|
|PDF File Size:||8.14 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||4.93 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Some MS 4 are in favour of this measure, as it would permit to build a more coherent and exhaustive 52309 of official controls. The key issues to be addressed by the review of the system of official controls as well as the changes to be included in the legislative framework have been extensively dscreto within the Working Group on the general cecreto of the Regulation set up within the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health SCFCAH .
Transparency and reporting to the public on fees for official controls by EU Member State. The main changes would be:. Annex XV lists a number of significant cases where, during the last 4 years, EU inspectors have reported that the reason for identified shortcomings in control activities or for unsatisfactory or insufficient levels of controls is attributed to the lack or shortage of resources.
Border Inspection Posts “BIPs” exist for the performance of veterinary checks on animals and products of animal origin, Designated Points of Entry “DPEs” carry out border checks on certain foods and feed of non animal origin, and entry points are designated by each MS for the performance of phytosanitary controls on imported plants and plant products.
Administrative burden and disproportionate requirements Reduce administrative burden and remove unnecessary requirements. The study has concluded that cost recovery rates are likely to be high for large FBOs of which there are few and low for small FBOs of which there are many. The option of requiring the establishment of a specific ring-fencing mechanism to ensure that fee revenues are recycled back in to the CAs’ budget would require legislative changes in a number of MS and could be difficult to implement.
EUR-Lex Access to European Union law
The Commission started a second consultation decrero MS through an ad hoc MS experts working group which met on 7 September They also reflect the Commission’s objective of ensuring proper enforcement of EU law, as this is the original objective edcreto the Regulation on official controls. Under the current system MSs already exhibit significantly wide variance see tables in Annex XVII in cost recovery levels, bonus malus arrangements and availability of information to the public.
In Junethe discussion paper was also sent to the Chief Veterinary Officers CVOs in order to identify any specific issues concerning in particular animal health laboratories. It recommended reviewing Articles 26 to 29 of the Regulation. Similarly, stakeholders did not request that data on ways to support micro-enterprises be obtained.
Ms were sceptical 5230-9 this measure, as it is incoherent with the risk-based approach of official controls and might lead to an ineffective use of financial resources by MS. Based on the above analysis, it is considered that an automatic exemption of micro-enterprises or SME’s in general from the application of fees would, on the one hand, undermine the policy objective of ensuring the long term sustainability of decrero control systems and, on the other hand, create potential distortions of competition.
EUR-Lex – SC – EN – EUR-Lex
Current rules require MSs to publish and communicate to the Commission fees’ calculation methods. Acceptance of the system by business operators is undermined by the perceived unfairness of the system, notably 52-309 the lack of “penalising” mechanisms for the less compliant actors.
The review of the Regulation was considered a good opportunity to take account of the findings of the report and consolidate controls where possible. The Food and Veterinary Office ”FVO” is a Commission’s service which contributes to the fulfilment of this task, by in particular carrying out audits in the MS to verify the implementation of agri-food chain legislation and the functioning of national control systems, and to collect information on implementation practices. This would result in a better allocation of control resources and, thus, in a more efficient control system.
Two Steering Group meetings were hold The Commission has attempted to accurately summarise and refer to those positions, which however had to be re-arranged for the purposes of this Annex.
As the problems identified by this review are linked to the current design of the EU legislative framework, its reform cannot be achieved by MS acting alone. Inconsistencies and legal gaps are due to the fact that EU legislation on official controls has in the areas of plant health, PRM and ABP developed separately from the general framework established by the Regulation, and overlap in control requirements derived from the co-existence, for animal health related controls, decrto the Regulation decrfto pre-existing sectoral legislation.
UECBV is not in favour of performance ratings such as smileys, since where such ratings exist, they differ very much from one Member State to another, can be misleading and may xecreto be comparable at an EU level.
Competitiveness – Option 2 would allow for the full implementation of the risk based approach to official controls in sectors where MS CAs are currently not allowed to adjust their control efforts to the actual risks i.
The rationale and the underpinning principles of such controls across the range of food chain products from plants to animals and animal products, to food and feed, animal by-products, food contact materials are the same and they conform to the overarching principle according to which border controls shall be limited and proportionate to what is necessary to contain the potential risks for humans, animals or plants. In order to do so the present review will take into account the outcome of the ongoing work to develop the EU legislation on IAS.
Furthermore, they could only be obtained through a complex mechanism for the calculation of standard EU costs and fees for each type of control, for the update and application of the chosen adjustment index, and appropriate monitoring tools to constantly update the EU fees. Box 7 — Examples of the costs of establishing a fees regime based on actual costs for the UK and Finland. Existing mandatory inspection fees are maintained but not applied to micro-enterprises; other provisions of the legislative framework remain unchanged.
On the other hand, in MS where the actual cost of each inspection is charged, amounts vary in relation to the hourly cost of control activities see box 9 below for examples. Across the EU fee rates vary considerably, not necessarily in relation with variances in costs. In light of the assessment above, it is considered that Option 4 i.
523–09 the current discriminatory treatment between those operators which 523-90 be charged mandatory fees for official controls they receive and those which can be charged, depending on whether Member States decide to collect non-mandatory fees, failure to address the perceived unfairness of the financing system might also increase the reluctance of industry to remunerate official control activities. As a result, CAs are not provided with the complete set of tools meant to ensure accountability, soundness and effectiveness 52309 their enforcement activities.
Evidence suggests that the increase in costs for those individual operators in sectors which would be covered by the extended scope of mandatory fees is likely to be of little significance for the overall production costs.
More than samples continue to be analysed each year across the EU. The final results of this study were made available to 53-09 Commission in February  and presented at the meeting of the Heads of Food Safety Ddcreto organised by the Swedish Presidency in Stockholm on September Given that the emergence of food safety risks does not necessarily depend on the size of an operator, the current system is based on the principle that all should be subject to official controls, without exception, as this is the only way to ensure a risk-based prioritisation of controls, an efficient use of resources and the safety of the agri-food chain.
The report showed that the new rules have introduced important changes to the way competent authorities “CA” organise and carry out official controls, establishing a more integrated approach which ensures confidence in the agri-food chain across the EU. Controls perfomed by the MS CAs on goods arriving from third countries ensure that the latter offer adequate guarantees that they meet equivalent safety levels. In this context, a survey of the Member States’ competent authorities was carried out by 523-099 of a questionnaire to collect both information on the state of the implementation of the rules on the financing of official controls and views about a series of possible options for addressing existing difficulties.
On the other hand, overlapping requirements subsist also in the animal health area, already covered by the scope of the Regulation, because of the co-existence of sectoral legislation which survived the adoption of the general framework in