Nederlandse Vereniging Diervoederindustrie
Nevedi
Nevedi formuleert, vertegenwoordigt en behartigt de collectieve belangen van de Nederlandse diervoederindustrie.
ID: 592626236605-86
Lobbying Activity
Response to Revision of the plant and forest reproductive material legislation
13 Jul 2021
Nevedi vertegenwoordigt de Nederlandse mengvoederindustrie. Bijdragen aan een verantwoordelijke en duurzame veehouderij is een van onze belangrijkste doelstellingen.
De productie van PRM en FRM vormt de basis voor een duurzame voedselproductie in de EU én voor een duurzaam bosbeheer. Daarnaast kan PRM bijdragen aan doelstellingen m.b.t. duurzame energie (biomassa) en uitgnagsmaterialen voor een bio-based economy.
Nevedi verzoekt de Commissie bij het herzien van de bestaande PRM en FRM wetgeving om
• Afstemming te zoeken met bestaande en te ontwikkelen wetgeving m.b.t. GMO’s en NBGT’s (New Breeding/Genomic Techniques)
• Het belang van het creëren van de mogelijkheid om gebruik te maken van GMO’s en NBGT’s omdat zij kunnen bijdragen om invulling te
geven aan de doelstellingen van de Green Deal en F2F Strategy (gezondere / duurzamere teelt, beter bestand tegen de gevolgen van de
klimaatontwikkeling etc.).
• Extra aandacht te schenken en mogelijkheden bieden voor productie/teelt van PRM voor de biologische teelten.
Read full responseResponse to Feed additives - revision of EU rules
25 Jan 2021
Nevedi (the Dutch association of feed Industry) welcomes the initiative of the European Commission to revise the feed additives legislation. Animal nutrition in general but feed additives especially can be of great value in offering solutions for a number of challanges the livestock sector is faces with. The ambitions formulated in the Farm to Fork Strategy require that the sector is enabled to develop and use safe technologies such as feed additives. The current legislation does not form a framework in which the full potential of additives can be utilised. It causes that the European feed industry can not utilise the full potential that technology holds.
We recognise a number of key issues that should be adressed in the revision of the feed additves legislation.
• To secure the lasting availability of (generic) feed additives. The European sector sees the number of (re)authorised generic additives declining comstantly. For some functional groups and certainly for smaller species/sectors (for example organic) only a few substances are left. We believe the legal framework should ensure safety first and foremost, but the process of (re)authorisation should be revised in order to reduce costs and build in incentives for potential applicants
• To stimulate further innovation: the potential of the use of feed additives on a number of important ambitions in European and national policy such as, the further reduction of the use of antbiotics, animal welfare and reduction of emissions such as NH3 and CO2/CH4 is high. This potential is not utilised at the moment because the lack of any products that have been authorised for these functions. In the revision of the feed additives legislation it should be examined how the development and authorisations of such products can be stimulated.
• To reduce dependency on third countries: The EU depends to much on the supply of certain feed additives originating from third countries, in particular Asia. This puts the interests of the European feed industry at harm, especially in case of disturbances of the market/logistics, like we have seen in Covid-19. This does not only cause risk of shortages but also increases the risk of fraud.
Nevedi welcomes the policy options and other actions the Commission mentions in the roadmap. They are all, without exception, very important and should be considered closely. On some topics however, no concrete actions/options are mentioned allthough these are of high importance as well. It concerns for example:
• Efficacy: the costs linked to the “efficacy” criterion should be reduced. It could be done so by considering policy options such as a “no efficacy requirement” for any additive, a concept of “generally recognised as efficient” or to require efficacy only when absence of efficacy may have negative effects on animal health or welfare and possibly others;
• Modernisation of labelling requirements: digitalisation offers opportunities to minimise administrative burden while ensuring that all people purchasing, handling or using feed additives or premixtures as well as control authorities have easier access to the information they need;
• Strategic status of certain feed additives: the EU Commission points to the dependency on Third Countries for its supply of vitamins as an issue to address but no policy option is proposed. We believe that the granting of a status of “strategic feed additive” should be considered in the future EU legislation on feed additives, in connection with the EU Communication on the EU Industry policy.
Read full response