Meeting of Experts on National Control Plans and Annual Reports Articles of Regulation EC No 882/2004 Result of the assessment of annual reports under MANCPs on Quality schemes (PDO/PGI/TSG and Organics) Grange, 25 November 2014

Outline Introduction Results of supervision on Control Bodies/Authorities Results of audit performed on activity of Competent Authority Results of control by Control Bodies/Authorities Type / Number of non-compliances in production Number/ Results of controls in marketplace Type/ Number of non-compliances in marketplace Type/ Number of fraud allegations Statement of overall performance of the control system Overall Conclusions

List of countries where PDO/PGI/TSG controls are included as a separate section: ATCZLUSK BEELPLUK BGETPT CYFRSE 3 On organics, 13 Member States were assessed (priority was given to MS where no FVO audits has taken place): BE, CY, BG, IE, HU, AT, DK, LU, SI, LV, LT, MT, SE Annual reports for year 2013 (in EN/FR version) available for LU, BG. Other reports from 2012, except for Ireland (2011) Introduction

14 Countries carried out supervision of control bodies. 6 countries provided figures on Controls, Control Type and inspections carried out. The information provided was in some cases very brief with no detail provided. 4 Results of supervision on Control Bodies/Authorities It appears that many MS experienced resource constraints which affected the execution of the control plans. The Competent Authorities appear overall satisfied with the performance of control bodies or control authorities. It is, however, difficult to confirm these statements as the reports provide, at most, only a synthesis of the audit results without sufficient supporting evidence.

10 countries indicated that they provided results of audits on activities of Competent Authority for controls in production and/or in market place. Results provided range from quite detailed (3 countries) to general intentions to improve performance of control bodies and No audits carried out. 5 Results of audit performed on activity of Competent Authorities The competent authority is in several cases in charge of several sectors/areas: information provided does not always specify whether internal or external audits concern the activities linked to official controls and other official activities related to organic production and labelling of organic products. The reports usually include a succinct reference to audits and, where carried out, the audits are mainly internal.

6 Results of control by Control Bodies/Authorities 7 countries provided results but again the quality was wide ranging. Some countries the data was too general or not related to PDO/PGI/TSG. Some countries described the supervision carried out and recommendations issued. 1 country stated that reports on monitoring were sent by all provinces. This information, albeit not in all cases, appears to be more detailed. However, further improvements are needed along previously issued guidelines and the regulatory requirements in force as from Information is generally available on inspected operators, in several cases broken down by type of operators and by mandatory annual inspections and additional risk-based visits, and on samples taken – for the future, need to complete as well in respect of announced/unannounced visits

7 Type / Number of non-compliances in production Of the 10 countries carrying out audits: 6 countries provided details on the number of controls carried out. Some countries carried out many controls in the market place, focusing on specific classes of product or carried out controls that were responding to alerts of unlawful use. The description and/or classification of the identified non-compliance is generally weak and qualitative information on the reasons or roots for non-compliance, any patterns in space or time, is generally missing.

8 Number/ Results of controls in marketplace 11 countries provided information on the Number and type of non-compliance. Some countries just stated that none were detected or gave specific percentages per system (PDO,PGI). No such information accept for isolated cases where information is mostly qualitative – nb for organic, important also to point to lack of information on import controls.

9 Type/ Number of non-compliances in marketplace Of the 11 countries, A few countries provided information on the type of non- compliances and type of inspection carried out. Some provided details on inspections relating to specific products on the market or inspections of specific classes of product (cheese, meat, etc.). No such information accept for one assessed Member State that provided information on the type of non-compliances and type of inspection carried out.

10 Type/ Number of fraud allegations Very few statements were provided by Countries. At least one country keeps control plan up to date, One felt objectives were fulfilled with one other country recognising that as the number of GIs grows, inspectors need to keep improving their competence. No such information was provided in the parts of the reports referring to organic production and labelling of organic products.

11 Statement of overall performance of the control system It is not clear if the controls are always related to PDO/PGI/TSG systems. It is also not clear if reports refer to market controls or verification of compliance with specifications. An overall statement of performance is available only in a limited number of cases.

12 Overall Conclusions It is clear data and information directly related to PDO/PGI/TSG schemes needs to be improved and provided by all countries. The topics of each slide above need to be addressed by all MS. Reminder: Every MS is a marketplace not only for the own PDO-PGI-TSG products but also of other Member States and third countries. The control of the correct use of these protected names should be controlled in the marketplace. This should be reflected in the AR. Overall, while some progress can be reported in the content and structure of information – further to the establishment in 2011 of specific guidelines on reporting requirements for the organic sector complementing those for the MANCPs and annual reports, there remain gaps or weaknesses in the necessary qualitative and quantitative elements to draw conclusions on the proper functioning of the control system for organic production and labelling of organic products.