Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-06-11-Speech-1-096"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010611.5.1-096"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
". – Mr President, Mrs Winberg, ladies and gentlemen, I thank everybody for their contribution to this debate. I have taken very careful note of the views expressed and will take them into account in the formulation of policy and in bringing forward legislation in due course.
On the question of price and standards and taking into account consumer concern for animal welfare, I am happy to tell you that Commissioner Fischler and I have initiated a debate at European Union level, and with all the Member States, on the question of food quality and the part that animal welfare plays in that context. This initiative, draws together a high-level, round table advisory group made up of primary producers, food processors, retailers and consumers. The group intends to visit all the Member States to discuss these issues. We have already visited Sweden, Ireland and Germany and we are scheduled to visit France, Belgium, the United Kingdom and Austria in the very near future.
We held an Internet chat last Tuesday, where we were asked in excess of 2600 questions in a period of two hours. By any calculation that is an extraordinary response which reflects people's enormous interest in issues relating to food quality and animal welfare. Many of the questions that were raised in that Internet chat were directed at the issue of animal welfare.
You can see from this that the Commission is taking this issue very seriously, it is constantly on the Commission's agenda and I look forward to bringing further proposals back to Parliament in due course on these issues.
I would like to finish by quoting what Mr Whitehead said in his speech calling for a food system in which 'people matter but animals matter too'. I fully agree.
Let me deal with a number of the individual issues that were raised by many of you. First of all, there is the question of animal transport. This is an issue that will get further attention from the Commission on production of the Scientific Committee's report in October, when consideration will be given to the important issues of density and length of time of transport.
I should issue a word of caution to those of you who have a strong desire for, or who expect, the elimination of live animal transport. Some people made the point that carcass transport should replace live animal transport. There is a very large trade in animals for breeding purposes and it appears that a very significant percentage of animals are transported for breeding purposes rather than for consumption. I have asked for more details on this but I am told that is the position. This issue will be considered in the light of the advice given to us by the Scientific Committee.
Another issue of considerable concern is the loading and unloading of animals. I expect that the scientists who advise us will also focus on that issue, maybe seeing it as even more important than the length of time over which an animal is transported, so long as the conditions under which the animal is transported are humane. I would remind you that legislation is already in the pipeline on the upgrading of the vehicles used for animal transport.
Mr Maat then asked me about the consequences for trade arising from the vaccination policy in the foot-and-mouth disease issue. I would repeat what Mrs Winberg said, that there will be a conference on this issue during the Belgian Presidency. It is an issue of particular complexity. We were very clearly advised that the most effective way, certainly in the middle of the crisis, of eliminating further spread is the culling of the animals concerned rather than the use of vaccination. Moreover there are at least seven strains of foot-and-mouth disease, all of which require a separate and distinct vaccination. The vaccination administered is effective for only six to nine months. If we were to vaccinate all of the animals in the European Union that are susceptible to foot-and-mouth disease, this would result in vaccinations being administered to 300 million animals every six months against seven different strains.
A really successful vaccination policy will only come about when science has developed a form of marker vaccination. That means that where a marker vaccination has been administered, a subsequent test will be able to identify whether an animal is a vaccinated animal instead of an infected animal. At present such a distinction cannot be made once a vaccination has been administered.
In those circumstances, the other trading blocs in the world are concerned about trading in animals which are vaccinated but may also be infected, thereby increasing the risk of spreading the infection in their own countries. This is not an unreasonable apprehension. We hope that science will develop this market vaccination for us and we will then be in a position to take further strides forward on this issue. This is something that will be discussed, however, and considered in the context of the conference before the end of the year, together with other issues.
The importation of vaccinated animals and the exportation of meat from animals that are vaccinated is governed by the OIE rules. They apply equally to exportation out of the European Union as they do to importation within the European Union. It is quite incorrect to say that different principles apply or that some discrimination operates against traders within the European Union.
Mrs Maes referred to the resources available and it is correct to say that there are four inspectors involved in this work. They draft reports, which are published of course, and forwarded to me for consideration as to whether infringement proceedings should be initiated or not. The present position is that infringement proceedings have been initiated against Greece and Belgium in relation to the implementation of Directive 91/628. The opening of infringement proceedings against Italy is also being considered. Furthermore, infringement proceedings are under consideration for the following Member States that did not comply with Article 8 of the directive, concerning the transmission to the Commission of their annual inspection report for the year 1999: Austria, the Netherlands and Portugal. I have given instructions to my staff to pay close attention to this issue. If there is a clear and persistent failure to comply with the legislation on animal welfare, infringement proceedings will be initiated against the Member State in question."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples