Explanatory Memorandum to COM(2005)694 - Agricultural products and foodstuffs as traditional specialities guaranteed - Main contents
Please note
This page contains a limited version of this dossier in the EU Monitor.
| dossier | COM(2005)694 - Agricultural products and foodstuffs as traditional specialities guaranteed. |
|---|---|
| source | COM(2005)694  |
| date | 23-12-2005 |
2. Since the creation of this scheme, 15 agricultural products and foodstuffs have been registered, some of which have significant economic potential. The Commission has received 18 further applications for registration from various Member States.
3. This instrument allows producers to realise the market value of their products while protecting consumers against abusive practices and at the same time guaranteeing fair trade. The main advantage provided by registration under the Regulation is product identification through a combination of the registered name, the expression “traditional speciality guaranteed” and the Community logo. Concerning use of the name, two options are provided: registration can be made with or without reserving use of the name for producers who comply with the product specification. Since the entry into force of the Regulation, only five registrations have been made where the name has been reserved. Member States are obliged to protect the expression “traditional speciality guaranteed”, the corresponding logo and the reserved names. Traditional specialities guaranteed do not constitute an intellectual property right within the meaning of the TRIPS Agreement.
4. It is necessary to ensure that producers in WTO member countries can benefit from registration without conditions of equivalence or reciprocity and that citizens of those countries with a legitimate interest be allowed to object to a registration. Lastly, under the clause on national treatment, producers from WTO members should be able to use the product specifications registered as traditional specialities guaranteed in the same way as producers from Member States. Furthermore, provisions are introduced to guarantee the applicability and coverage of existing intellectual property rights such as trade marks and geographical indications.
5. The proposal also aims to simplify and elucidate procedures and clarify the responsibilities of the various authorities involved in scrutinising applications. It is clarified that the duties best performed nationally must of course be assigned to the national authorities, while ensuring that all interested parties, including those in third countries, are treated equally.
6. The current procedure for registering traditional specialities guaranteed is a two-stage process. An application for registration is first submitted by a producer group to the competent authorities in the Member State concerned. The national authorities then send the application to the Commission, with a view to its registration; the Commission then sends the translated application to the other Member States.
7. Member States usually send the Commission applications that are far too detailed and voluminous. It is accordingly proposed that only the product specification in stricto sensu should be transmitted to Community level, the national authorities instead being responsible for evaluating the traditional and specific characteristics of the agricultural products and foodstuffs concerned.
8. The Commission publishes the main details of an application in the Official Journal of the European Union , so allowing anyone with a legitimate interest to object to the registration. It is proposed to define the grounds on which an objection is admissible, so that the Commission can avoid having to deal with objections that are on occasion vexatious and unreasonable. These measures will ease the administrative burden at Community level.
9. The proposal contains many simplifications and clarifications. It has become evident that the purpose of the original Regulation is not sufficiently clear to the producers and other operators concerned. The terms used are complex and the definitions not precise enough. Even the term “traditional” has not been defined. It is also proposed to rectify certain inconsistencies, such as the length of time during which objections can be made where a specification is amended, which is fixed at six months in one paragraph but at three months in another.
10. Where appropriate, system improvements identical to those proposed for the system to protect geographical indications and designations of origin are proposed, particularly as regards control arrangements, registration and objection procedures, the obligatory reference to “traditional speciality guaranteed” and to the Community logo on product labelling and recourse to a Management Committee for matters relating to applications for registration.
11. Consultations have taken place with the stakeholders on the main thrust of these amendments. Discussions within the Advisory Group on the quality of agricultural products (June 2005) and the Regulatory Committee on certificates of specific character for agricultural products and foodstuffs have drawn attention to the importance of the system and provided examples of its success.
12. The proposed measures have no impact on the general budget of the European Communities.