B4-0041/96

Resolution on the impact of the conclusions of the Commission's scientific conference on growth promoters in meat production (29 November to 1 December 1995)

The European Parliament,

- having regard to the Commission's reply to the oral question on the effects of the findings of the scientific conference on growth promoters in meat production held by the Commission from 29 November to 1 December 1995 (B4- 1431/95),

- having regard to its previous resolutions on this subject, and in particular those of 16 March 1995 on combating the hormone mafia ((OJ C 89, 10.4.1995, p. 150.)) and 22 September 1995 on the conference on the use of growth activators in stockfarming ((OJ C 269, 16.10.1995, p. 227.)),

A. whereas Directive 88/146/EEC ((OJ L 70, 16.3.1988, p. 16.)) prohibits the use of certain substances with a hormonal effect in stockfarming,

B. whereas in its abovementioned resolution of 22 September 1995, Parliament called unequivocally for the maintenance of the hormone ban and the stepping up of controls,

C. whereas the conference concentrated principally on questions of a veterinary and scientific nature and either ignored or mentioned only in passing the effects of growth promoters in meat production on the health of animals, the composition and quality of meat, the concerns and expectations of consumers and the development of agricultural markets and structures,

1. Takes note of the final conclusions of the scientific conference organized by the Commission;

2. Remains convinced that account must be taken, in the decision-making process on controversial social, economic and environmental problems, of discoveries in the field of (natural) science, but points out that it is of vital interest to democracy that the final decision on issues of this kind should rest with society itself in the person of its elected representatives;

3. Calls on the Commission and Council, in accordance with the resolutions already adopted by Parliament, steadfastly to oppose the import of hormone- treated meat into the EU; wishes the total ban on the use of growth promoters in stockfarming to be maintained; condemns the negligent attitude of the Council and requests it to adopt forthwith the proposal for a Council Regulation banning the use in stockfarming of certain substances having a hormonal or thyrostatic action and of beta-agonists (COM(93)0441) ((OJ C 302, 9.11.1993, p. 8.)), submitted by the Commission as far back as October 1993, on which Parliament delivered an opinion on 19 April 1994 ((OJ C 128, 9.5.1994, p. 106.)), and which was subsequently amended by COM(94)0293 ((OJ C 222, 10.8.1994, p. 16.));

4. Calls on the Commission to submit a proposal as soon as possible for an amendment to the veterinary medicaments directive restricting the definition of medicaments to those with a therapeutic effect, thus ruling out the use of such products to speed up meat growth in animals; repeats its proposal for adding a fourth criterion to the present three @ safety, quality and effectiveness @ in the procedure for the approval of non-therapeutic veterinary medicaments, requiring an objective study of the social and economic consequences and an environmental impact assessment;

5. Welcomes the fact that in this conference the Commission discussed publicly the current state of affairs with regard to the use of growth promoters for meat production, but regrets that too little attention was given to relevant questions underlying the EU's decision to ban hormones, such as the socio- economic and environmental impact and expectations of consumers, i.e. the effects on meat quality, on the welfare of animals, and on agricultural structures and markets, particularly in the beef and milk sectors;

6. Stresses the need for Commission action in this field to be in conformity with the 1992 CAP reform;

7. Calls on the Commission to hold a follow-up conference without delay, in cooperation with the European Parliament, dealing with the above issues, the problem of controls on the manufacture and distribution of substances with a hormonal effect, the possibility of taking account of provenance and quality labelling and effects on agricultural trade policy, and in which producers, consumers, environmental and Third World interest groups, farming bodies, inspectors of national control departments and animal rights groups take part and speak, since they too should be entitled to put their point of view in the debate;

8. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission and the governments of the Member States.