(1)

Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations, the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products and periods stipulated in the Annex thereto.

(2)

In compliance with the above criteria, the standard import values must be fixed at the levels set out in the Annex to this Regulation,

(1)

By Decision 2003/487/EC (1), following a recommendation from the Commission in accordance with Article 104(6) of the Treaty, it was decided that an excessive deficit existed in France. The Council noted that the general government deficit was 3,1 % of GDP in 2002, above the 3 % of GDP Treaty reference value, and projected both by the French authorities and the Commission services to be above 3 % in 2003, while the general government gross debt stood at 58,2 % of GDP, and was very likely to breach the 60 % Treaty reference value in 2003.

(2)

On 3 June 2003, in accordance with Article 104(7) of the Treaty and Article 3(4) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1467/97 of 7 July 1997 on speeding up and clarifying the implementation of the excessive deficit procedure (2) (EDP), the Council made a recommendation, based on a recommendation from the Commission, addressed to France with a view to bringing the excessive deficit situation to an end by 2004. The recommendation was made public.

(3)

In October 2003, the Commission considered that the measures taken by France had been insufficient to comply with the recommendation of 3 June 2003 and recommended that the excessive deficit procedure be stepped up. Instead, on 25 November 2003, the Council adopted conclusions addressing recommendations to France for the correction of the deficit by 2005, which were annulled by the Court of Justice of the European Communities on 13 July 2004 (3). On 14 December 2004, the Commission adopted a Communication to the Council which concluded that 2005 should be considered as the relevant deadline for the correction. It also concluded that actions taken by France until then were broadly consistent with a correction of the excessive deficit by 2005, based on an adjustment in cyclically adjusted terms of some 1 % of GDP over 2004 and 2005. On 18 January 2005, the Council concurred with this view.

(4)

In accordance with Article 104(12) of the Treaty, a Council Decision on the existence of an excessive deficit is to be abrogated when the excessive deficit in the Member State concerned has, in the view of the Council, been corrected.

(5)

In accordance with the Protocol on the excessive deficit procedure annexed to the Treaty, the Commission provides the data for the implementation of the procedure. As part of the application of this Protocol, Member States are to notify data on government deficits and debt and other associated variables twice a year, namely before 1 April and before 1 October, in accordance with Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 3605/93 of 22 November 1993 on the application of the Protocol on the excessive deficit procedure annexed to the Treaty establishing the European Community (4).

(6)

Based on data provided by the Commission (Eurostat) in accordance with Article 8g(1) of Regulation (EC) No 3605/93 following the notification by France before 1 October 2006 and on the Commission services' autumn 2006 forecast, the following conclusions are warranted:

(7)

In the view of the Council, the excessive deficit in France has been corrected and Decision 2003/487/EC should therefore be abrogated,

(1)

The Deputy Secretary-General of the Council was authorised by Decision 1999/870/EC (1) and Decision 2007/149/EC (2) to act, in the context of the integration of the Schengen acquis within the European Union, as representative of certain Member States for the purposes of concluding contracts relating to the installation and the functioning of the communication infrastructure for the Schengen environment (‘SISNET’) and to manage such contracts, pending the migration to a communication infrastructure at the charge of the European Community.

(2)

The financial obligations arising under those contracts are borne by a specific budget (hereinafter ‘the SISNET budget’) financing the communication infrastructure referred to in those Council Decisions.

(3)

The new Member States, within the meaning of the 2003 Act of Accession, with the exception of Cyprus, are to be integrated into the first generation Schengen Information System (SIS 1+) on a date to be set by the Council in accordance with Article 3(2) of the 2003 Act of Accession, (hereinafter the ‘SISone4ALL project’).

(4)

From that date, those Member States should participate in the budget.

(5)

Two Member States, Ireland and the United Kingdom, which contribute to the SISNET budget, but which are not connected to the Schengen Information System, should not contribute to additional costs entailed by the SISone4ALL project,

1.

Article 1 shall be replaced by the following:

(*1)   OJ L 66, 6.3.2007, p. 19.’;"

2.

Article 25(1) shall be replaced by the following:

3.

A new sentence shall be added to Article 26:

‘The additional costs resulting from the extension of the communication infrastructure to the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia shall not be borne by Ireland or the United Kingdom.’;

4.

A new paragraph shall be added to Article 28:

5.

Article 29 shall be amended as follows:

6.

The fifth subparagraph of Article 37 shall be replaced by the following:

‘The Advisory Committee shall endeavour to adopt its opinions by consensus. If such consensus is not possible, the Advisory Committee shall adopt its opinions by a simple majority of its representatives. A quorum of 19 shall be required for the proceedings to be valid. In the event of a tied vote, the Chairman shall have the casting vote.’;

7.

Article 39(a) shall be replaced by the following:

8.

Article 43(4) shall be replaced by the following:

9.

Article 49(c) shall be replaced by the following:

(1)

By way of derogation from Directive 2000/29/EC, Commission Decision 2005/51/EC of 21 January 2005 authorising Member States temporarily to provide for derogations from certain provisions of Council Directive 2000/29/EC in respect of the importation of soil contaminated by pesticides or persistent organic pollutants for decontamination purposes (2) authorises, for a limited period, Member States participating in the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) programme on prevention and disposal of obsolete and unwanted pesticides to permit the introduction of soil contaminated by such pesticides into the Community for treatment in dedicated hazardous waste incinerators.

(2)

Since the implementation of that programme has been delayed, the period during which contaminated soil may be introduced under the authorisation granted by Decision 2005/51/EC should be extended.

(3)

Decision 2005/51/EC should therefore be amended accordingly.

(4)

The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Plant Health,

(1)

Article 53 of Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 provides for the possibility to adopt appropriate Community emergency measures for food and feed imported from a third country in order to protect human health, animal health or the environment, where the risk cannot be contained satisfactorily by means of measures taken by the Member States concerned.

(2)

After being informed by the authorities of the United States of America that maize products contaminated with the unauthorised genetically modified maize called Bt10 were likely to have been exported to the Community and in view of the European Food Safety Authority statement concluding that in the absence of sufficiently comprehensive data it was impossible to carry out a full risk assessment of Bt10 in accordance with the standards laid down in Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council (2), the Commission adopted on 18 April 2005 Decision 2005/317/EC on emergency measures regarding the non-authorised genetically modified organism Bt10 in maize products (3).

(3)

Decision 2005/317/EC requires that consignments of maize products originating from the United States of America and likely to be contaminated (namely corn gluten feed and brewers grains for feed use) may be placed on the market only if an analytical report demonstrating that the products are not contaminated with genetically modified maize Bt10 is provided.

(4)

In order to ensure proportionality and to avoid any restriction of trade going beyond what is required to protect human health, animal health or the environment, Decision 2005/317/EC contains a review clause to assess whether the emergency measures were still necessary.

(5)

The measures were reviewed twice in October 2005 and March 2006 and, in consultation with the Member States the Commission concluded that they should remain in place until further information on exports of maize products likely to be contaminated with Bt10 was available.

(6)

According to the analytical data provided by Syngenta, the company that developed the genetically modified maize Bt10, the tests completed in the United States and conducted in accordance with a test method validated by Joint Research Centre of the European Commission and verified by the United States Department of Agriculture show that no sample has tested positive to the presence of Bt10 since early November 2005. The appropriateness of the detection method has been further analysed and recently confirmed by the Joint Research Centre of the European Commission.

(7)

On the basis of the information recently provided to the Commission by the United States authorities a series of actions have been taken by Syngenta with the involvement of the United States Department of Agriculture to ensure that Bt10 will not be propagated in the company's germoplasm and/or distributed in the commercial production pathway.

(8)

Since the entry into force of Decision 2005/317/EC only one case of Bt10 entering Community territory has been registered, on 24 May 2005. A shipment of maize products contaminated by Bt10 left the United States before the availability of the analytical results of the testing and was notified by the importer prior to the arrival of the vessel to Ireland. The placing on the market of the contaminated products was thus prevented.

(9)

Apart from this specific case, no finding of Bt10 has been reported by Member States on the basis of the controls carried out by national competent authorities.

(10)

On the basis of this information it can be concluded that it is no longer necessary to keep in place the compulsory certification requirement. It is therefore appropriate to repeal Decision 2005/317/EC.

(11)

It is nevertheless appropriate that Member States keep monitoring, for a further period of six months, on the basis of a proper level of random testing, whether maize products contaminated by Bt 10 are still present on the market. Positive (unfavourable) results shall be rapidly communicated through the Rapid Alert System for food and feed in which case the Commission will evaluate whether further action is required.

(12)

The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health,

—

corn gluten feed containing or produced from genetically modified maize within CN code 2309 90 20 ,

—

brewers grains containing or produced from genetically modified maize within CN code 2303 30 00 .

(1)

Commission Decision 2003/804/EC of 14 November 2003, laying down animal health conditions and certification requirements for imports of molluscs, their eggs and gametes for further growth, fattening, relaying or human consumption (2), and Commission Decision 2003/858/EC of 21 November 2003, laying down animal health conditions and certification requirements for imports of live fish, their eggs and gametes intended for farming, and live fish of aquaculture origin and products thereof intended for human consumption (3) refer to third countries on the list established by Commission Decision 2006/766/EC of 6 November 2006 establishing the list of third countries and territories from which imports of bivalve molluscs, echinoderms, tunicates, marine gastropods and fishery products are permitted (4) as regards the authorisation for importation into the Community of live molluscs and fish products intended for human consumption.

(2)

According to Commission Regulation (EC) No 2076/2005 of 5 December 2005, laying down transitional arrangements for the implementation of Regulation (EC) No 853/2004, (EC) No 854/2004 and (EC) No 882/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council and amending Regulation (EC) No 853/2004 and (EC) No 854/2004 (5), Member States may in a transitional period ending on 31 December 2009, under certain conditions, authorise the import of bivalve molluscs and fishery products as regards public health aspects from the countries listed respectively in Annex I and Annex II to that Regulation. Imports from those countries may only be marketed on the domestic market of the importing Member State or Member States allowing the same import.

(3)

Decisions 2003/804/EC and 2003/858/EC should also permit import from countries on the lists established by Regulation (EC) No 2076/2005.

(4)

The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health,

‘(a)

the third country of dispatch appears either on the list established by Commission Decision 2006/766/EC (*1) or, during the transitional period referred to in Commission Regulation (EC) No 2076/2005 (*2), on the list established by that Regulation;

‘(a)

the third country of dispatch appears either on the list established by Commission Decision 2006/766/EC (*3) or, during the transitional period referred to in Commission Regulation (EC) No 2076/2005 (*4), on the list established by that Regulation;