ITA PRESENTATION AT THE EC MEETING

On behalf of ITA, Mr. Das Gupta made a presentation covering sev-eral key aspects of tea trade. The issues addressed included MRL status of Indian tea; India's understanding of the EC guidelines and regu-lations; clarity of the EC laws so as to empower exporters to operate from a position of strength; impress upon the EC that field data from tea pro-ducing
countries such as India should be taken into cognisance while fixing MRLs from time to time.

KEY ASPECTS
The EC has four basic MRL-related council directives 76/895/EEC, 86/362/EEC, 86/363/EEC and 90/642/EEC the last one being relevant to tea.
A draft proposal for 'Regulation of the EU Parliament and Council on MRLs in Products of Plant and Animal Origin' was presented by the EC on March 14, 2003. The proposal would replace and simplify the four basic Council Directives.
The Draft proposal would have to go through due processes of ap-proval by the European Parliament (which was expected by end-2003) and thereafter be subject to a one-year "phase-in" period (for the residue to move through the food chain), which would mean that the proposal should come into effect by end-2003/early-2005.
Till such time, the Council directive 90/642/EEC as amended from time-to-time would prevail and imports into the EU from Third World countries would be subject to the MRLs stipulated.

However, a separate EC regulation (dated 20 November, 2002) has been enforced by modifying Directive 91/414/EEC, which would result in the withdrawal of authorisation to "use" around 400 specified substances for plant protection within the EU.

Directive 91/414/EEC on the placing of plant protection products on the market is the primary piece of EC legislation for plant protection products and their active substances. It provides for a Community evaluation of the active substance and for member states to evaluate and authorise the use of products containing them using agreed hazard endpoints and risk assessment criteria.

As per the 91/414/EEC Directive, use of a number of chemicals within the EC would have to be discontinued with effect from July 25, 2003.

This Directive, however, is not on MRL and imports into EU from Third World countries would continue to be governed by 90/642/EEC.

At the Brussels meeting, the Indian team raised the following salient issues in regard to the process of setting MRLs and their implications on tea producing countries such as India:

 Continuous changes in MRLs disrupt agricultural practices.

 As tea is not grown in the EU, field data from producing countries (representing wide diversity of agri-climatic zones) should be considered for fixing MRLs for tea.

 EC should support moves for harmonisation of MRLs (with other standards like CODEX) in the interest of a seamless global trading system.

 EC should consider redefining MRLs for tea not on dry matter but on infusion basis (as per cent transfer of residues into the brew is signifi-cant) a study conducted in India was cited.

The EC authorities were not receptive to alignment with CODEX (citing that CODEX is based on "too little data") and stated that infusion argument had been duly factored in the MRL setting process. Many CODEX MRLs are not acceptable to the EC, particularly those set prior to the late 1990s. It, however, did not formally object to them at the time. Therefore, the EC authorities will have to critically examine on a case-by-case basis whether CODEX MRLs ensure the same high level of sanitary protection that would be expected from the EC's own MRLs. The EC authorities were, however, appreciative of India's position re-garding the need to document the pesticide usage conditions in tea growing countries.

The EC would be open to receiving data and dossiers in a structured format from Third World countries on an on-going basis which would be given due consideration and credence while shaping its position on tea-related MRLs.
Where an importer wants to import a commodity treated with a sub-stance in
use in the Community, but where the foreign Good Agricultural Practices (GAP) gives higher residues than the Community-critical level, the marginal data specific to the GAP for the crop would be needed since a dossier and rapporteur member state would be available. The process would involve:

 Notifying the national MRL for the product in question.
 Declaration and corroboration by Government/Statutory Body of GAP being followed, including details of pre-harvest application data.
 Generation of data by Indian tea research institutions (TRA and UPASI-TRF) based on stipulated number of supervised trials the num-ber of which
would vary depending on the importance of the food product from the standpoint
of trade and diet.