Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-02-28-Speech-3-103"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010228.6.3-103"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
". – First of all, in response to Mrs Doyle, the situation, as you will appreciate, is evolving hour by hour but I can confirm that, as we speak, there is no confirmation of the situation in Armagh about which you asked me. Obviously, there is active surveillance of the situation. Authorities are keeping the farm under close surveillance and it has been closed. I will have clarification of that situation later in the day.
With regard to your own constituency of Wexford, Mrs Doyle, I do not have any reports of the rumours that you reported. Nothing has been brought to my attention in relation to that.
With regard to surveillance at borders, this is a matter for Member States themselves. I can assure you that, from my contacts with Member States and, indeed, from their own observation of the situation, they are perfectly well aware of the seriousness of the situation. Focus must be on the restriction of live animals and then also on animal products.
I am aware, from reports that have been made available to me, that Member States are taking the kind of precautions that we would regard as being suitable to eliminate movement and to try to ensure the lowest level of risk.
Mr Graefe zu Baringdorf asked me about compensation. As you may have heard from Mrs Schreyer when she spoke earlier this afternoon, compensation is available. There is a budget line for this kind of situation but, as she indicated to you, there are budgetary limits. I understand that approximately EUR 50 million a year are available for this. I am not aware of the exact amount of money available for an issue such as this, but I believe it is somewhat less than EUR 50 million.
Mrs Lynne asked me about the differentiation in designation between regions and countries. The situation is that any third country that has an outbreak of foot-and-mouth in any particular region is precluded from exporting products to the European Union. This is done as a result of legislation which requires that any product exported must be accompanied by a certificate stating that it is free of foot-and-mouth. If a region is incapable of providing that certification, then the product cannot be exported. That has been the situation in the past and continues to be the situation and it has applied in a situation quite recently.
With regard to the question relating to the small abattoirs, I did touch on this earlier in my own statement. I would refer again to what I said in my statement and repeat that foot-and-mouth disease was a bigger problem in the past than it is now. I gave you instances of what outbreaks there have been in the more recent past, one in Italy and a small one in Greece on the Turkish border.
We have been remarkably free in the European Union from foot-and-mouth disease over that period of time. With regard to any application for or any authorisation of compensation to the UK, we are awaiting any application for compensation and it will obviously be given the appropriate consideration in the usual way."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples