NoC52/30 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanCommunities 19.2.94
regulationshouldcomeintoforce,laiddownin
Article24,shouldlogicallybe1January1994,inaccordancewithArticle11aofthenewEAGGFGuid­
anceRegulation .
DoneatBrussels,21December1993.
TheChairman
oftheEconomicandSocialCommittee
SusanneTIEMANN
Opinionon:
—theproposalforaCouncilRegulation (EEC)concerningtheprohibitionontheusein
stockfarmingofcertainsubstanceshavingahormonalorthyrostaticactionandof
P-agonists,
—theproposalforaCouncilRegulation (EEC)onmeasurestomonitorcertainsubstances
andresiduesthereofinliveanimalsandanimalproducts,and
—theproposalforaCouncilRegulation (EEC)amendingRegulation (EEC)No805/68on
thecommonorganizationofthemarketinbeefandveal(*)
(94/C52/10)
On28October1993theCouncildecidedtoconsulttheEconomicandSocialCommittee,
underArticle198oftheTreatyestablishingtheEuropeanEconomicCommunity,onthe
abovementioned proposals.
TheSectionforProtectionoftheEnvironment ,PublicHealthandConsumerAffairs,which
wasresponsibleforpreparingtheCommittee'sworkonthesubject,adopteditsOpinionon
7December1993.TheRapporteurwasMrKienle.
Atits311thPlenarySession(meetingof21December1993),theEconomicandSocial
CommitteeadoptedthefollowingOpinionbyamajority,withsixvotescastagainst.
1.Generalcomments enforceexistingprovisionsontheuseofcertaingrowth­
promotingsubstances,tocombatinparticularthe
increasingmisuseofp-agonistsforfatteningpurposes;
totightenupandfocuscontrolprocedures;andto
createthepreconditionsformoreeffectiveadministrat­
ivesanctions .
1.3.TheCommitteeemphatically supportsthese
effortstoreducepotentialpublichealthhazards,to
preventdistortionsofcompetitioninagriculturecaused
byimproperproductionmethodsandtostrengthenthe
confidenceofconsumers .1.1.Theguaranteedsupplyofhigh-qualityfood­
stuffstothepublicatreasonablepricesisanimportant
aimbothoffarmpolicyandofconsumerpolicy.
1.2.Inordertopreventmisuseofprohibitedsub­
stancesinstockfarming ,theCommissionhasnowpro­
posed[inCOM(93)441finalof22September1993]
far-reachingandinsomecasesdrasticmeasures.They
aredesignedtoimprovetechnicalcontrols,inorderto
1.4.Itshouldnot,however,beoverlookedthatfor
yearsviewsdivergedconsiderablyintheEuropean (x)OJNoC302,9.11.1993,pp.8,12-25.

19.2.94 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanCommunities NoC52/31
theCommissionproposalsonthenecessary'further
steps',seriousquestionsarise,particularlyastothe
proportionality ofresourcesandwhetherthereisa
balancedinvolvementof,andobligationon,allthe
partiesconcerned,includingthirdcountries.Communityonwhetherhormonalsubstancesshould
beallowedorbannedinstockfarming .In1981certain
hormones—stilbeneandthyreostaticsubstances—
wereprohibitedforfatteningpurposes.In1985the
ECCommission ,inaccordancewithscientificopinion,
wishedtopermitarangeofnaturalhormonestoassist
fattening,butthismetwithadeterminedproteston
thepartofconsumersandproducers.However,various
authorizations persistedincertainMemberStates,until
on1January1988hormonalsubstanceswiththyreos­
tatic,oestrogenic,androgenicandgestageniceffects
werecompletelyprohibitedintheCommunity .
1.5.IndependentlyoftherulesappliedintheEC,at
presentfatteningagentsbasedonnaturalhormones
andregardedasharmlesstohealtharelegallyadminis­
teredinmanypartsoftheworldthroughimplantsor
feed.ProblemsintraderelationsbetweentheCom­
munityandthirdcountries(awell-knownexampleis
the'hormonewar'withtheUnitedStates)aretheresult
ofthis.
1.6.Thecompletebanfrom1January1988meant
thatpriorityhadtobegiventoharmonization oflegal
provisionsandtotheeffective,uniformapplicationof
controlsandsanctionsintheeventofcontraventions .2.Ontheuseorprohibitionofhormonalsubstances
and^-agonistsinstockfarming
2.1.ImportantelementsoftheProposalfora
CouncilRegulationconcerningtheprohibitionofcer­
tainsubstanceshavingahormonalorthyrostaticaction
andofP-agonistsare:
—consolidationoftheexistingprohibitions ;
—futureinclusionofaquacultureinthefieldofappli­
cation;
—theconditionsfortheadministration ofhormones
fortherapeuticpurposestobreedinganimalsare
clarified;
—theadministration ofP-agoniststofarmanimals
(excepthorses)isprohibited (e.g.clenbuterol).
2.2.TheCommitteewelcomestheCommissionpro­
posalsinprinciple,butfeelsitnecessarytomakethe
followingcriticalcommentsandraisethefollowing
questions:
2.2.1.TheCommissionrightlyreferstotheincreas­
ingmisuseofP-agonistsforfatteningpurposes.The
CommitteeofcoursesupportstheCommissioninits
attempttothwartmisuse.However,itexpectsthe
Commissiontogiveaclearexplanationofitsarguments
forproposingabanontheuseofclenbuterolevenas
aveterinarymedicament .
Itiswellknownthatclenbuterolhashithertobeen
permittedasaveterinaryproductinmostMember
StatesoftheCommunity—foranimalprotectionand
economicreasons—andisregardedbyfarmersand
vetsasanessentialmedicamentfortreatingrespiratory
diseases(particularlyincalves),andasaperinatalaid
forcattle.HencecertainMemberStatesareconsidering
banningtheuseofclenbuterolforcalf-fatteningonly
fromtheageoftenweeks—takingaccountofthe
legalwaitingperiods.
2.2.2.IntheCommittee'sview,theuseofP-agonists
inthirdcountriesandthecorresponding traderestric­
tionsarenotadequatelytakenintoaccountinthe
Commissionproposal,andtheCommissionfailsto
explainwhythebanontheuseofP-agonistsisnot
appliedtothirdcountries.
ItisthereforeworthquotinganearlierESCOpinion
of29January1986(!),alsoonthegeneralsubjectof
residuesinmeat,totheeffectthat'morefavourable1.7.TheCommission'sCommunication tothe
CouncilandtheEuropeanParliamentonthecontrol
ofresiduesinmeat(hormones,P-agonistsandother
substances )—COM(93)167finalof21April1993—
broughttolightconsiderabledeficienciesinanumber
ofkeyareas:theseincludedthetranspositioninto
nationallawofdirectivesoncombattingfraud,equip­
mentandworkoflaboratoriesandthemonitoring
ofbasicchemicals.Therewasalsoclearlyalackof
coordinationamongthevariousnationalbodies.Other
problemswerealackofeffectivedeterrentmeasures,
thelengthinessoflegalprocedures,andinsomecases
alsodoubtaboutthewillofthehighestrelevantauthori­
tiestoprovidethenecessaryfunds.Bynomeansthe
leastofthedifficultieswerefacedbylocalmonitors
responsibleforcombattingirregularities .
1.8.Fortunately,theCommissionhassincereported
ageneralimprovement inthesituationandusefulpro­
gressattheCommunitylevel.
1.9.Nonetheless ,theCommissionregardsfurther
stepsasbeingnecessary,allthemoresoasitdescribes
itselfasbeingconfrontedwithadetermined,flexible
andorganizednetworkofdealersinthesesubstances,
whichenableusersanddealerstomakeconsiderable
profits.
1.10.TheCommitteeregardstheCommission'scon­
clusionsascorrectandnecessary.However,inassessing (!)OJNoC75,3.4.1986.

NoC52/32 19.2.94 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanCommunities
3.3.2.TheCommitteeregardstheguaranteespro­
videdbythirdcountrieswheretheuseofhormonesis
commonasinsufficientlycertainorcredible.conditionsfortradetotheCommunitycannotbegiven
tothirdcountriesthantoMemberStates...'.
2.2.3.Althoughthereisnodoubtthatthehormonal
substancesbannedforuseinfatteningareoftenillegally
importedfromthirdcountries,theCommissionpro­
posalsshouldusealllegalandpracticalpossibilitiesto
ensurethatallquantitiesofhormonalsubstancesand0­
agonistsatthestagesofmanufacture ,storage,loading,
transport,distribution ,saleorimportfromthird
countriesarefullyrecordedandcontrolled .4.Penalties
4.1.Theabovementioned Commission Communi­
cationoncontrolofresiduesinmeat,inparticular,has
drasticallyrevealedthelegalandenforcementdeficitof
theMemberStates.TheCommissioniscorrecttopoint
outthatpreventionoftheuseofbannedsubstances
dependsonfullsupportfromstockfarmers ,absolute
politicaldetermination andtheactivecooperationof
allconcerned.Butthisalsomeansthat,inorderto
preventthelawbeingbroken,allpartiesmustbeliable
topenalties.
4.2.TheCommitteethereforeconsidersthatthefol­
lowingcriticalcommentsarecalledfor:
4.2.1.Article24ofthedraftRegulationstatesthat
wheremisuseissuspectedthecostofinvestigations ,
checksandtheslaughteringofalltheanimalsistobe
bornebythefarmerwithoutanyfinancialcompen­
sation.Inaddition,thedeletionofArticle4jofRegu­
lationNo.805/68meansthattheentireherd,notjust
individualanimalsfoundtohavebeentreatedwith
prohibitedsubstances,willbeineligibleforthebeef
premium.
TheCommitteecallsupontheCommissiontoreassess
whetherdestructionofthefarmer'slivelihood (which
appearstobetheinevitableresultofimplementation
ofArticle24)isreallysuitableornecessaryasasanction
anddeterrent.
4.2.2.TheCommitteealsofeelsthattheprincipleof
equalityoftreatmentisnotguaranteedifveterinarians
andpharmacists,intheeventofillegalconduct,are
onlythreatenedwithextremelyvague'suitablepenal­
ties'.HeretootheCommitteecallsupontheCom­
missiontoreassessitsproposals.
4.2.3.TheCommission isnodoubtawarethatthe
proposedpilloryingofoffendersisclearlyunconsti­
tutionalinatleastsomeoftheMemberStates.3.Monitoringofliveanimalsandanimalproducts
3.1.ThedraftCouncilRegulationonmeasuresto
monitorcertainsubstancesandresiduesthereofinlive
animalsandanimalproductscontainsthefollowing
mainpoints:
—residuedetectionplansnotonlyformeat,butalso
infutureforallfoodstuffsofanimalorigin;
—reversalofthesamplingratio,i.e.futuresampling
mainlyinfarmsandlessinabattoirs;animalfeed,
drinkingwaterandexcrementaretobeanalyzed
aswell;
—whereresiduesarefoundin10%ofanimalsin
abatch,thewholebatchistobeconsideredas
suspect;
—thepersoninchargeoftheanimalswillberequired
tomakeawrittendeclarationthattheanimalsare
freeofresidues;
—thirdcountriesaretosubmitanannualplanwith
guaranteesonfreedomfromresidues.
3.2.Themassoftightercontrolsanddraconianpen­
altiessetoutinthedraftRegulationwillundoubtedly
actasamajordeterrentanddomuchtouncover
irregularitiesandoffences.Inthisrespect,theCom­
mitteewelcomesthedraftRegulation .
3.3.However,thefollowingcriticalcommentsseem
appropriate .
3.3.1.TheCommitteeregardsasinadequatethe
Commissionproposaltoobligetheproducertogive
theslaughterhouse supervisorawrittenstatementto
theeffectthathehascompliedwithlegalrequirements
andtakesfullresponsibility .Suchanobligationwould
notconformtolegalpracticeintheMemberStates
andwouldconstituteblanketdiscrimination againstthe
massoflaw-abidingproducers.Considerablebureau­
craticexpenditurewouldalsobeinvolved.Itisparticu­
larlyquestionablefortheslaughterhouse tobethe
addresseeofsuchstatements,sincetheslaughterhouse
isapartnerofthefarmer'only'underprivatelawand
henceinnowayaneutralbody.5.Funding
5.1.TheCommittee isnotatallsatisfiedwiththe
Commission'sstatementsonfundingtheproposed
measures .
5.1.1.OntheonehandtheCommission statesthat
theproposals'donothaveanyimpactontheCom­
munitybudget,orinvolveadditionalburdensfor
SMEs'.
5.1.2.Ontheotherhanditiswell-knownthatcoher­
ent,efficientimplementation ofthemonitoring
measuresonthesamebasisinallMemberStatesmust
leadtoconsiderableincreasesinstaffandequipment

19.2.94 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanCommunities NoC52/33
costs.TheCommitteecallsupontheCommissionto
makeclearstatements,particularlyonthelikelysums
involvedandonthewaythecostswillbeshared.
5.2.Uptonowresiduedetectionsamplinghastaken
placeaspartofgeneralfoodstuffsmonitoring .Another
partofthecostsofsuchcheckshasbeencoveredby
thefeeschargedforgeneralmeatmonitoring .The*
Commissionnowintendstorecoupthecostssolely
throughfeeschargedtoproducers,underaproposed
amendmenttoCouncilDirective85/73/EEC.
5.3.TheCommitteethereforethinksitnecessaryto
askwhether,withsuchashiftingofcostsontoall
law-abidingfarmers,thenecessarybalancebetween
producers'responsibilityandthepublicinterestisstill
maintained .Thequestionalsoarisestowhatextent
thirdcountries,withtheirimports,participate
adequatelyinthecosts—i.e.withoutgainingacom­
petitiveadvantage .
6.Furtherconclusions
6.1.Pastexperienceshowsthatthevastmajorityof
farmersbehaveabsolutelycorrectlyanddonotuseproblematicorbannedsubstances .Thesefarmersare
particularlyhard-hitbycompetitiondistortionsandthe
lastingdamagetothegoodreputeofmeatandmeat
productscausedbytheillegaluseofbannedproducts
topromotefattening.
6.2.Inadditiontotheresolutedriveagainstoffences
whichisprescribedbythedraftRegulation,further
actiontomakeallconcernedfullyawareoftheproblem
shouldbediscussedbyCommunitybodiesandinthe
MemberStates,inparticularinfarmers'andconsumers'
organisations .Furthermore ,consideration shouldbe
given,astheCommissionsuggests,toconsiderrevising
thetradeclassificationregulationinordertoreduce
possibleincentivestousesuchproductsforfattening
purposes.Consumersshouldbeproperlyandobjec­
tivelyinformed.Aboveall,consumersmustbemore
fullyawarethattheirpurchasedecisionsandtheirques­
tionstofarmers,processorsandshopkeepersgivethem
aspecialopportunitytoinfluencethepracticesand
productsoffarmersandthefoodindustry.
6.3.Finally,theCommitteestronglyurgesthat,after
thenewprovisionscomeintoforce,afurtherdetailed
surveyshouldbemadetoascertaintheireffectiveness .
DoneatBrussels,21December1993.
TheChairman
oftheEconomicandSocialCommittee
SusanneTIEMANN