Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the "Proposal for a Council Directive on Community measures for the control of classical swine fever"

(2001/C 148/06)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS,

having regard to the proposal for a Council Directive on Community measures for the control of classical swine fever (COM(2000) 462 final - CNS 2000/0214);

having regard to the Council decision of 2 October 2000 to consult it, under the first paragraph of Article 265 of the EC Treaty;

having regard to the decision of its President of 23 October 2000 to entrust Commission 2 - Agriculture, Rural Development and Fisheries - with the preparation of the opinion;

having regard to Council Directive 80/217/EEC of 22 January 1980 introducing Community measures for the control of classical swine fever;

having regard to the draft opinion adopted by Commission 2 on 16 January 2001 [CdR 377/2000 rev. 1 - rapporteur: Mr Eveslage, Councillor of the municipality of Barssel, Vice-chairman of the German Association of Towns and Municipalities (D/PPE)],

adopted the following opinion unanimously at its 37th plenary session of 14 and 15 February 2001 (meeting of 14 February).

The Committee of the Regions

1. welcomes the European Commission's efforts to improve the control of classical swine fever in the Community with a draft Directive;

2. notes with regard to Article 2(c) of the draft Directive that it is not clear from the definition of the term "holding" which parts of farm buildings and farmland are covered; and therefore suggests that this be clarified by stipulating that the term covers all premises for keeping hoofed animals including the associated outbuildings and the land attached to the holding;

3. notes with regard to Article 2(m), that the term "owner" is a fixed legal term and that the term "stock farmer" should be used instead;

4. would remark with regard to Article 2(u) that an "area with a high density of pigs" cannot be fixed as a geographical area with a radius of 10 km but rather should relate to the actual pig density in the prohibition areas, observation areas and protection zones that are to be established;

5. criticises with regard to Article 5(1)(b) and Article 7(2) of the draft Directive that the expression "a sufficient number of samples" used in these Articles is too general and creates planning uncertainty; and suggests that a key related to the size of the holding be laid down for the number of samples to be taken;

6. notes with regard to Article 4(2)(f) and (g) that the written authorisations required from the competent authority for persons and vehicles entering and leaving a holding can result in costs and paperwork for regional and local authorities that are out of all proportion to the actual benefits which are likely to accrue; and therefore suggests that consideration be given to whether it would be sufficient, as regional and local authorities think, to list the persons and vehicles in a register;

7. would point out with regard to Article 7(3) in conjunction with Annex V that it should be made clear that the criteria listed are not mandatory or binding but that in accordance with the subsidiarity principle and the need for effective control of swine fever, the competent national, regional and local authorities can adopt a suitably flexible approach to each case;

8. notes that the measures in the established protection zones, as provided for in Article 10, are very far-reaching and should therefore be supplemented by a general obligation on the part of the European Commission to implement a buying-in programme when the prohibition period exceeds 42 days;

9. proposes that Member States ensure that in regions with a high domestic or feral pig density special checks or surveillance measures are introduced that permit early recognition of the risk of classical swine fever.

Whether the ensuing costs can be charged to domestic pig farmers or hunting permit holders is a matter which should be discussed;

10. expressly welcomes the provision in Article 20 stipulating that in order to avoid an outbreak of classical swine fever, feral pigs can also be vaccinated against the disease;

11. welcomes with regard to the possibility of emergency vaccinations provided for in Article 19 that the competent national, regional and local bodies can decide in future about the implementation of emergency vaccination, given that they can judge local circumstances and epidemiological links from close range;

12. proposes that if a marker vaccine is available, ring vaccinations can be carried out over a limited period and area in regions with a high pig density as an additional means of combating classical swine fever;

13. remarks with regard to Article 19(4) that it will be scarcely possible to sell the meat of vaccinated animals on the market; and therefore calls on the European Commission to lay down a compulsory buying-in programme for these pigs and their products;

14. recommends that steps be taken in the accession negotiations to ensure that the candidate countries from central and eastern Europe can be included in schemes for controlling classical swine fever via the application of Community animal health legislation;

15. calls on the European Commission, in the light of its draft Directive, to review the older Directives 89/662/EEC and 90/425/EEC and to update them if necessary.

Brussels, 14 February 2001.

The President

of the Committee of the Regions

Jos Chabert