(1)

Article 19 of Commission Decision 2008/721/EC of 5 September 2008 setting up an advisory structure of Scientific Committees and experts in the field of consumer safety, public health and the environment and repealing Decision 2004/210/EC (1) states that members of the Scientific Committees, scientific advisors from the Pool and external experts shall be entitled to an indemnity for their participation in the meetings of the Committees, thematic workshops, working groups and other meetings and events organised by the Commission, and for serving as Rapporteur on a specific question.

(2)

Annex III to Decision 2008/721/EC fixes at EUR 300 the indemnity for each full day of participation, at EUR 150 the indemnity for participating in a morning or afternoon meeting, and at EUR 300 the indemnity for acting as Rapporteur. The latter may be increased at EUR 600 where fully justified and subject to availability of budget for questions which are particularly demanding in terms of workload.

(3)

That Annex also states that the Commission will regularly assess the need to adapt these indemnities in light of prices indexes, the evaluation of indemnities paid to experts in other European bodies and the experience on the workload for members, associated members, other scientific advisors and external experts. The first assessment should take place in 2009.

(4)

The current level of indemnities was fixed in 1997 for the members and experts of the predecessors of the Scientific Committees in question and has not been re-evaluated since then. The daily indemnity adapted taking into account the consumer prices increase in the period 1997-2008 based on the Consumer Price Index Data of Eurostat would be of EUR 381,50 This amount should be rounded up to EUR 385.

(5)

The distinction between full day and half day meetings should be eliminated in order to take into account travelling and transport time.

(6)

In light of experience, the workload for Rapporteurs depends substantially on the complexity and duration of the activities needed to complete the opinion, taking into account the complexity of the issue, the availability and accessibility of data, the amount of literature to be examined, the need for collaboration with other bodies and the extent and complexity of stakeholder and public consultations required. The current two levels for the Rapporteur indemnity do not reflect the actual range of situations and therefore a wider modulation of the Rapporteur indemnity should be introduced,