Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-12-17-Speech-2-016"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20021217.1.2-016"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, it was essential that we learned from the foot and mouth crisis which struck the United Kingdom in 2001, because it reached such unprecedented levels in the UK, as a result, in particular, of mistakes – on the part of the British Government as well as the Commission – in the area of contingency planning, because it posed such a serious threat to other European countries and, lastly, because it gave us a terrifying reminder of how quickly this disease can break out, how fast it can spread and of the damaging economic and psychological consequences that it can have.
Our committee has, on the whole, done a good job. The Kreissl-Dörfler report particularly emphasises, and this is a crucial point, that the sheer size and specialisation of herds, the livestock density in certain regions, the closure of local abattoirs and the astonishing increase in the transport of live animals are factors which, in the absence of prophylactic vaccination, enable the epidemic to spread like wildfire. When we come to examine the future agricultural policy guidelines, we must remember this, in order to ensure that we encourage farming that is evenly spread throughout the countryside and that we refuse to encourage regions to specialise to a major degree in high-density holdings. It is therefore clear, for example, that the withdrawal of milk quotas – which the European Commission appears to favour – might very soon lead to the end of milk herds in areas that have natural handicaps, such as mountainous or rainy areas, and the increase of livestock density in plains. We must therefore ensure that we maintain a network of family-run farms of a manageable size; this is the best possible way to prevent foot and mouth disease.
Our temporary committee was right to recommend emergency vaccination as the best way to combat the epidemic, since this avoids the mass slaughter which, understandably, caused such great public outcry and was so distressing for farmers. When hundreds of millions of people are starving, it is unacceptable to destroy the meat of millions of healthy animals, which is what happened in 2001. With emergency vaccination, a pen will be set up near the source of the epidemic where the animals will be vaccinated, animals which could then potentially be destroyed and used for consumption without the pressure of an emergency situation. On this point, however, I regret the fact that the Commission did not make bolder proposals. With the progress made in vaccinations – we now have vaccinations with a broader spectrum, longer-lasting vaccinations and marker vaccinations which make it possible to distinguish vaccinated animals from infected animals – it is now possible to give Member States the freedom to authorise or even make compulsory prophylactic vaccination, in other words preventative vaccination, as applied before 1992, where the risks of epidemics are the highest. This possibility should be left to the discretion of the Member States, which are best placed to assess the consequences of specific risks for their livestock.
I also regret that the report does not call more clearly into question the current framework, laid down by the International Office of Epizootics, the rules of which are obviously too rigid, too restrictive and too dogmatic as far as the conditions for granting ‘FMD-free area’ status are concerned. It is obvious that they are excessively in favour of New World countries, which have a large amount of open space, where the land is less densely populated and which, therefore, face less of a risk of a disease spreading. It is an absolute necessity that these rules are developed.
Mr President, we are now destined to live under the constant threat of further outbreaks of foot and mouth disease, as new strains are constantly coming to the fore. This is especially true of Europe, which is surrounded by countries where foot and mouth is endemic. This is particularly true of Turkey, which represents a constant danger, and the rest of the Middle East and North Africa too. There have also been a number of outbreaks in Asia and Latin America. The globalisation of the live animal trade can therefore only encourage and accentuate the globalisation of diseases and viruses. This explains why short journeys are preferable, why a certain inappropriate form of extreme specialisation which increases animal transport over long distances must be rejected, why rearing and fattening on the same farm premises is preferred and why slaughter must be carried out in the producing region. These methods are dictated by common sense and are the best possible way to prevent the development of new diseases. We must remember this, Mr President, Commissioner, when we come to debate the future CAP, if we want to avoid a repeat of the nightmare of 2001."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples