§ Mr. BakerTo ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1) if he will list the dates on which he or his predecessors have exercised the power under Regulation 11(3)(c)(ii) of the Seed (National Lists of Varieties) Regulations 1982 (as amended) to require the testing of potato seeds for disease, pest resistance, general256W characteristics and consumer quality; and if he will provide details of each such occasion and the reasons for it; [59043]
(2) for what reasons he is proposing to abolish his power to require the testing of potato seeds for disease, pest resistance, general characteristics and consumer quality under Regulation 11(3)(c)(ii) of the Seed (National Lists of Varieties) Regulations 1982 (as amended). [59044]
§ Mr. Rooker[holding answer 9 November 1998]: The tests for disease and pest resistance, general characteristics and consumer quality required in regulation 11(3)(c)(ii) of the Seeds (National Lists of Varieties) Regulations 1982 (as amended), have been published annually in the September and/or October edition of the Plant Varieties and Seeds Gazette since 1985.
This requirement was introduced in 1985 for potatoes for the same reasons as the other requirements of regulation 11(3)—that is to encourage breeders to screen varieties before entering them in to the statutory system and to deter them from entering varieties which had little chance of addition to the National List, at a time when the trialling system was overloaded and heavily subsidised. Some limited use may have been made of such data to persuade applicants to withdraw applications with little chance of success.
A fundamental review of the National List trials system was undertaken in 1992, in consultation with plant breeders. Following this, a streamlined system of trials for Value for Cultivation and Use (VCU) was introduced. This addressed the problems arising from the volume of applications for addition to the National List. The staged reintroduction of fees for official VCU trials in 1994 and 1995 reinforced the measures already taken to streamline the system. The requirement to submit the results of tests required pursuant to regulation 11(3)(c)(ii) had no value once the pressure on the system was relieved. A requirement to provide information which serves no purpose and which is not used places an unnecessary and unjustifiable burden on applicants. I therefore propose to revoke regulation 11(3)(c)(ii) for the same reason as I propose to revoke the rest of regulation 11(3).