Variety Registration Working Group II

1
Variety Registration Working Group II

• June 20-21, 2005

2
Overview

• Consultation Feedback
• What we heard you say
• Consultation Elements
• What should be in the proposal
• Discussion Elements
• 6 elements for discussion

3
Consultation Feedback

• What we heard you say was.
• Need for a registration system that is
• Flexible
• Responsive
• Timely
• SMART!!

4
Consensus Elements

• Tiered registration system
• Application information requirements
• Consequential and Other Amendments
• Restricted Registration

5
Consensus Element 1 Tiered Registration System

• Schedules with requirements ranging..
• From mandatory full merit assessment
• To listing with no mandatory prior assessment
• To exemption from Registration

6
Consensus Element 2 Application Info
Requirements

• For crops with merit assessment
• Application information requirements should
  remain status quo
• For crops without merit assessment
• No committee recommendation or supplementary data
  required.

7
Consensus Element 3 Consequential and Other
Amendments

• Seeds Regulations
• Part I
• Limiting importation of seed crops in Schedule A
  to pedigreed seed in general and to registered
  varieties for own use.
• Part III
• Additional registration refusal capabilities for
  applications with false information and varieties
  considered harmful in all regions
• Registrant responsible for costs for
  suspended/cancelled varieties

8
Consensus Element 4 Restricted Registration

• Interim and Regional Registration
• Should apply to Schedule A, Sections i-iv
  (mandatory merit assessment sections excluding
  Section v which deals with health and safety
  concerns)
• Contract Registration
• Terms Conditions should be set case-by-case
• Addition of suspension, cancellation, and refusal
  capabilities for non-compliance

9
June 20-21 Discussion Elements

• Schedules
• Performance Information
• Consultation Framework
• Crop Schedule Change Process
• Registration Process for Crops Previously Exempt
• Contract Registration

10
Schedules

• Schedule AB merged
• Crop kinds requiring the collection of
  pre-registration performance information (whether
  or not that information is used for merit
  assessment and whether or not the information is
  collected on one or more of the elements related
  to agronomics, disease, or quality)

11
Schedules

• Rename Schedules
• Schedule A/B Former AB
• Schedule C Current Schedule C
• No data collection required
• Exempt Crop Kinds
• Health Safety Issue (CFIA/Health Canada NA to
  schedule placement)

12
Schedules

• Placement
• Determined by a multi stakeholder Crop Specific
  Working Group (CSWG)
• -Schedule 1, one or more of agronomics, disease
  or quality
• - Schedule 2, No merit evaluation submitted to
  VRO
• - Exemption

13
Minimum requirements for use of CFIA Certified Tag

• Require Schedule C listing of crop for use of
  CFIA tags
• For the initial phase, current exempt crops would
  not be required to enter Registration to use CFIA
  tags
• An option for voluntary listing of exempt crops
  on a variety basis was also discussed
• Requires careful management of any transition

14
Performance Information

• Clearly distinguish between Pre- and Post-
  Registration performance testing
• Specifics of Pre-Registration including the data
  to be collected, protocols, or third party
  oversight to be determined by Crop Specific
  Working Group (CSWG)

15
Post-Registration Performance Information

• Source of considerable anxiety for some crop
  kinds and regions
• VRO has no mandate for Post- Registration
  testing, but there was strong emphasis that the
  CSWGs should organize testing based on resources
  available

16
Crop Specific Working Groups

• Mandate Forum for consensus building, transfer
  of info, some authority to make decisions (ie
  merit traits for registration)
• Membership inclusive of all value chain
  representatives
• May use existing groups where appropriate, not
  another bureaucratic layer
• Aim for national scope but recognize regional
  differences (cereals, forages)

17
Crop Specific Working Groups

• Recognize that they are organized and funded for
  purposes other than Variety Registration
• Role for NFS to identify existing organizations
  as functional models for others
• i.e. Support stable funding for Post-
  Registration testing
• Resource to be consulted as warranted

18
Contract Registration

• Canadian Grain Commission (CGC)
• Risk Based Model to determine the eligibility of
  varieties
• Presentation by Laura Anderson