Regulatory threats to seed exchanges and plant movements

[Hillview croconut]

The simplest solution to the registration problem is to have ornamentals exempt from the process. After all is just not sufficiently jusifiable to have such an expensive system in place to ensure product  reliability. Sure I can understand the need for quality control and certification for food or fibre crops but not for ornamentals. We all have had the experience of feeling a bit cheated if we receive a different plant to the one we ordered but I am sure we would opt for this occasional blunder than a grossly over-regulated world where many of our old favorites just disappear (because lack of large-scale demand causes them to be dropped from the big boys' catalogues) and the only new varieties will be those mass-produced for the garden centre market, a la Hellebore Anna's Red and Penny's Pink (gratingly ghastly names for simpletons or the Simpsons - sorry my snobery is showing!).

That probably won't happen because of bureaucratic vested interest and the propensity of the big end of town to grab an opportunity no matter how our wiser it comes from.  At least EU members can try and, as they say,  save the furniture, by demanding, pleading, begging the committee members to apply the eminently sensible commonly know criteria.

So come on you guys in Europe do it for all of us!  Send in a letter.  Make your thoughts known.  Demand reasonable, sane regulations that work for everyone. Maggi has said people can't rally if they are unaware of the cause. I will add policy makers won't react to stakeholder pressure if they have no idea that group exists nor anything of their concerns.

Cheers, Marcus

[Hillview croconut]

 Postscript: for those who don't have the time to follow all the ins and outs of this, " commonly known" criteria could be applied to all those many thousands of plants that are well known in the trade and should require no further registration description than "Commonly known". Ditto plants already on existing registration lists like the registers of lily cultivars, daffodils, tulips, etc.

M

[Margaret]

Hi Marcus

Your efforts were not in vane with me anyway. I emailed yesterday and got the reply below today .  Since she invites further correspondence I would be happy to put any other comment (within reason!!) you would like to make to her.

Come on everyone contact your MEP!

 Dear Ms. Turner, 
Thank you for your email regarding the Plant Reproductive Material Proposal.
On your behalf I have contacted Ms. Julie Girling MEP, who is the Conservative Shadow Rapporteur on this file in the European Parliament. Ms. Girling informs me that she will be working with Mr. Silvestris, and also DEFRA in the run up to the amendment deadline, which has been set for the 4th December. Ms. Girling also informs me that she will bear your comments mind when she comes to amend the draft proposal.
As your London MEP I would be happy to receive further comments and suggestions on this legislative issue as it moves through the European Parliament. I have offices in London and in Brussels, and if there is anything else you would like to bring to my attention please do not hesitate to get in touch. I am here to work on your behalf and would be delighted to hear from you.
Yours sincerely,
Marina Yannakoudakis, Conservative MEP for London
 

[Hillview croconut]

That's terrific Margaret. Lets hope all the EU members who visit the Forum and benefit so much from it see the significance of this protest and put their pens or keyboards into service.   I am honestly still very surprised by the lack of comment on the forum about this matter 

Cheers, Marcus

[Margaret]

Hello Marcus and Everyone

I've had another reply. This time from the Eastern Counties MEP, Stuart Agnew .  Great support from him. Anyone else had a reply?

[Maggi Young]

I think that  in such a campaign to protect freedom and rights for amateur gardeners and the precious small nurseries, we should be grateful for support from whatever party will offer it. This area of Scotland is represented by six MEPs  from various political parties - I'm writing to all of them.

[Hillview croconut]

You grab your support where you can. "The enemy of my enemy is my friend .... temporarily.  M

[Hillview croconut]

At the risk of batting on about this to long ... maybe a close to home example of what could happen might raise some interest.

Michael Wickenden of Cally Gardens and nursery has been mentioned several times on the Forum recently. Michaell is fiercely opposed to PBR and refuses to offer plants that are registered under this scheme and only sells plants that are not.  Under these imminent changes to plant registration he will be hugely disadvantaged, even more so if the majority of his  catalogue are from his own breeding program,. This is because under these rules the onus will fall on him to register descriptions of plants he is currently offering BEFORE he can start selling these again. This will cost him around £500 a plant.  You do the maths ... its not a great incentive to carry on bringing new plants into the market.  The only group who are advantaged by this are the mass marketers where economy of scale is the key and plants run a long second. This dear friends is the likely scenario for the future unless people wish to save the inventive and interesting segment of the market protest now.

Does ANYONE on this forum know whether species are included in this insane system?  Or will their published descriptions stand as sufficient? This is a major issue to clear up. Please someone try and clarify the position on this!

Cheers,  Marcus

[Palustris]

This came from someone at Monsanto who are being blamed for some of this proposal.
Take it anyway you choose.

Actually Monsanto is not driving this as we already have most of the IP protection we need under existing legislation.

As is often the case we are blamed for most things, only some of which are true.

This is quite a good resource for sifting out the most lurid fabrications from what is true:

www.monsanto.com/newsviews/Pages/Issues-and-Answers.aspx

[Maggi Young]

Personally, I  do think it is useful to see that at least one member is taking these potential threats to our nurseries and clubs seriously enough to bother to contact legislators and to show their responses -  clearly we can all draw any conclusion we like from the party political comments made by certain MEPs , but at least it shows he bothered to reply - which may encourage others to make contact with their representatives.
Clearly some members take offense at the comments of the UKIP MEP - but as a  UKIP member replying to a member in England - he might be expected  to take that tack.

As  has been said,  in  the event of even the possibility of  the seed exchanges of all our clubs being shut down and the specialist nurseries - so important to our interests -  forced out of business, I think support must be garnered  form every source and the widest possible number of MEPs informed of the  worries being caused by this  matter - and not just in  the UK but in all the countries of the EU - where we have so many members.

[Gerry Webster]

I have no objection to people lobbying MPs or MEPs on matters of concern to them. However, I do object when an MEP uses  these concerns as a pretext to promote xenophobia - already bad enough in the UK - & to indulge in a spot of ignorant EU bashing.

[Tim Ingram]

Maggi - having had a quick scan through the 140 plus pages of proposals, small scale enterprises and specialist societies exchanging plant and seeds between members are effectively exempt. In theory it looks like species are included as much as anything else but there are several paragraphs relating to small scale and niche growers - see the following extracts:-

Proposal for a
REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL
On the production and making available on the market of plant reproductive material
(plant reproductive material law)

Furthermore, plant reproductive material exchanged in kind
between two persons other than professional operators is excluded from the scope of
the Regulation.

Derogation on niche market plant reproductive material
In addition, proportionate and sustainable rules for small scale activities concerning
plant reproductive material, which is adapted to local conditions, and made available
on the market in small quantities, should be established. Such varieties should be
exempted from the requirements on registration and making available on the market.
This material is defined as niche market plant reproductive material. The exemption
should concern e.g. farmer-breeders or gardener-breeders whether being professional
operators or not. However, some basic rules on labelling and traceability of the
material should be laid down. In order to prevent an abuse of the exemption the
material should only be made available on the market in a defined size of packages.

(27) Plant reproductive material which is made available on the market only in limited
quantities by small producers (“niche market plant reproductive material”) should be
exempted from the requirement of belonging to a registered variety. That derogation is
necessary to prevent undue constraints to the making available on the market of plant
reproductive material, which is of lesser commercial interest, but is important for the
maintenance of genetic diversity. However, it should be ensured that that derogation is
not regularly used by a wide range of professional operators and it is only used by
professional operators which cannot afford the costs and administrative burden of
variety registration. This is important to avoid abuses of that derogation and to ensure
the application of the rules of this Regulation. Therefore, niche market material should
only be made available on the market by professional operators employing a small
number of persons and with a small annual turnover.

This is not to say that these proposals seem excessively bureaucratic and intrusive. The real problem with smaller scale enterprise is convincing many gardeners that plants are a lot more interesting and significant than they presently realise, which has never been easy. In practice it is hard to see how many of these proposals can ever be instituted in such a varied market.

[Maggi Young]

Yes Tim, I agree that there do seem to be some protections available meantime - my concern - and that of others who have made pivate contact about this - is to make sure that there is awareness by the legislators that such protection is vital and that erosion of any protection offered is not contemplated - it is  much easier to close the stable door while the horse is still inside!

[meanie]

Although I have signed several petitions on this, Margarets letter/email was so good that I copied it, edited it a wee bit (just details such as my name etc) and emailed it to my MEP. Sadly he's a Tory, so I doubt that I'll get a response.

[johnralphcarpenter]

I've sent the Plant Heritage letter to all South East MEPs, which include Nigel Farage. Interested to see responses!