These criteria should be trigger values, implying that, in the event of any overshooting, food business operators are to take corrective action and to notify the competent authority.

However, the European Commission strenuously objects to the action taken since the overshoot was largely due to the failure of US Customs to record declared imports against the EU quota. Only US Customs had the complete picture of how much Wheat Gluten had been imported, yet they were posting misleading data on their traders' internet site about the room for further imports under quota.

Discussions then concentrated on the following questions: - salaries and amounts of the appropriations intended in particular for trans-European networks, research and the peace process in Northern Ireland; this question covered to a large extent the EP amendment creating for those objectives a "reserve for Union priorities" consisting of ECU 300 million not specifically entered under headings 2 (Structural action) and 3 (Internal policies); - the "legal bases" question (arrangements for implementing the rule that all expenditure must in principle have a legal basis, with possible exceptions being defined); - information procedure for ...[+++] fisheries agreements in the event of an overshoot of the appropriations for those agreements following Commission negotiations with third countries in the course of the year; - letter of amendment No 2 - and possibility of including that letter in the ongoing budget procedure - submitted by the Commission on 7 November 1996 and aimed at incorporating in the budget the effects of the decision taken by the Agriculture Council on 30 October 1996 to assign an extra ECU 500 million to direct support for producers' incomes or for the beef and veal sector.