WRITTEN QUESTION E-1715/02

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(13 June 2002)

Subject: Vaccination with a marker vaccine in place of preventive slaughter of healthy animals in the next outbreak of swine fever

1. Does the Commission recall that after the outbreak of swine fever in the Netherlands in the spring of 1997 11 million pigs were preventively killed and destroyed in order to prevent any further spread of the disease, and that the cost of this procedure, which caused great public indignation, was EUR 1,35 billion of Community funds?

2. Is the Commission aware that the transportation and temporary storage of 180 million kilos of the unusable carcasses of slaughtered animals, with dung, urine and blood leaking from lorries in the process, may have been a contributory cause to the further spread of the disease?

3. Is it correct that the only valid reason for not carrying out preventive vaccination since 1992 against swine fever and other list-A animal diseases in the EU Member States was that a marker vaccine, which allows a clear distinction to be made, for purposes of meat inspection prior to export, between meat from affected pigs and that of vaccinated pigs, was not yet available?

4. Can the Commission confirm the report in the Netherlands TV programme Dokwerk (VPRO, Nederland 3, Peel, pest en politiek, part 2) of 26 May 2002 that at the time of this epidemic the firm Intervet had a marker vaccine available, but that it could not be used because it had not yet been registered and recognised by the Commission, although the firm currently has a supply sufficient to carry out preventive vaccination of 18 to 20 million pigs?

5. Has a field test been carried out with the Intervet vaccine in the meantime? If not, why not? When will the test be completed? What is the Commission doing to ensure that a final result becomes available as early as possible?

6. What else is there to prevent the use of a marker vaccine, and hence the final abandonment of mass preventive slaughter and destruction of healthy animals, in preparing for the next outbreak of swine fever?

7. What is the Commission doing to ensure that when the next outbreak of swine fever occurs preventive slaughter is not once again used instead of vaccination, although there is now no public support for this approach, there are fewer and fewer people who are willing to carry out the task, and FAO Director-General Jacques Diouf has condemned it?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(22 July 2002)

1. and 2. The experience gained in relation to the serious epidemic of classical swine fever in the Netherlands in 1997-1998 was taken into full consideration by the Commission in its proposal for a Council Directive on Community measures for the control of classical swine fever (CSF)(1). However, the Commission wishes to clarify that the cost for the Community budget of this epidemic amounts to about 50 % of the figure given by the Honourable Member.

3. Vaccination against certain animal diseases may mask the presence of a virus in a vaccinated population and lead to the further spread of disease in non-vaccinated animals. This is one of the reasons for stopping generalised preventive vaccination against classical swine fever and foot and mouth disease in the early 90s. Marker vaccines may be a helpful tool to overcome this problem and lead to new possibilities in trading animal products from areas where vaccination has been applied.

4. to 6. The Commission cannot confirm that a marker vaccine against classical swine fever was available in 1997. In recent years two companies have developed new vaccines which, in principle, might be successfully used as marker vaccines as they only induce immunity against one of the classical swine fever virus proteins. In 1999, in the framework of the preparation of its proposal on classical swine fever, the Commission financed a trial to test these two vaccines and the corresponding discriminatory tests.

This trial indicated that the efficacy of these two vaccines might be sufficient to reduce the spread of virus in an emergency situation. However, the diagnostic tests available were not suitable to distinguish the vaccinated but infected animals from the non-infected ones. The results of this trial have been forwarded to the two companies in question and are available upon request.

These two vaccines have obtained authorisation for marketing in accordance with Community legislation but, at present, they cannot be used as marker vaccines. However, in the light of the results of this trial, the approach to vaccination and the potential use of marker vaccines proposed by the Commission was supported by the Parliament and by the Council which, in October 2001, adopted Council Directive 2001/89/EC of 23 October 2001 on Community measures for the control of classical swine fever(2). In accordance with this Directive the use of these vaccines as marker vaccines would be possible in an emergency situation if reliable discriminatory tests become available.

7. The Commission is aware that massive slaughtering of animals in relation to classical swine fever or other animal diseases raises ethical questions. Therefore, it has undertaken a number of actions to ensure improved disease prevention and control.

These actions include:

- further research into the International Office of Epizootics (OIE) list A diseases supported by successive Research Framework Programmes. In the 5th Framework Programme research for the development of marker vaccines is clearly marked as a priority in the Quality of Life and Management of Living Resources Programme, in particular in Key Action 2 Control of Infectious Diseases. Two projects are currently on-going aiming at the development of a marker vaccine for CSF: the Research and Technological Development (RTD) project QLRT-2000-01374 (2001-2004) Immunological mechanisms of protection against classical swine fever virus: towards the development of new efficacious marker vaccines (EUR 1 million); and the RTD project QLRT-2000-01346 (2001-2004) Identification of efficacious delivery systems for recombinant and nucleic acid construct vaccines against classical swine fever virus (EUR 1,57 million).

- the request to the Scientific Committee to provide a report on newly developed techniques for the diagnosis of contagious animal diseases and on the use of these techniques to reduce and avoid the slaughter and destruction of non-infected animals;

- the authorisation granted to Germany by Commission Decision 2002/161/EC of 22 February 2002 approving the plans submitted by Germany for the eradication of classical swine fever in feral pigs in Saarland and the emergency vaccination against classical swine fever in feral pigs in Rhineland-Pfalz and Saarland(3), the control of which is particularly difficult in some areas of the Community taking into account that infected wild boar is currently the most dangerous source of virus for the domestic pig.

The forthcoming proposal for a Council Directive on foot and mouth disease will provide the opportunity for a revised EU-wide consensus on the future approach towards future outbreaks of this disease, including the role of vaccination and preventive slaughter.

(1) OJ C 29 E, 30.1.2001.

(2) OJ L 316, 1.12.2001.

(3) Commission Decision 2002/161/EC, OJ L 53, 23.2.2002.