WRITTEN QUESTION P-1067/01

by Claude Turmes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(26 March 2001)

Subject: Infringement of EU directive 95/29/EC by Netherlands transporters of animals

What action does the Commission intend to take in response to the fact that Netherlands transporters of animals inspected on Luxembourg territory are frequently found to violate EU Directive 95/29/EC(1) on the transport of animals with regard to loading densities and the state of health of the animals carried (according to the Luxembourg customs authorities, the twelve most serious infringements of the law in respect of the transportation of animals in 2000 were committed by Netherlands transporters)?

In particular, the Commission has been notified of a Netherlands transporter, VAEX, which has repeatedly drawn attention to itself for systematically infringing EU Directive 95/29/EC on Luxembourg territory. Have, in this case, all of the possibilities afforded by mutual assistance under Article 18 of the directive been exhausted by the Commission and the two Member States, the Netherlands and Luxembourg?

Why has the European Food and Veterinary Office (FVO) not carried out an inspection of national control structures in respect of the transportation of animals in the Netherlands and Denmark (Commission report of December 2000 concerning implementation of the directive on the transport of animals (COM(2000) 809), although the two countries in question are among the principal exporting countries for live pigs?

(1) OJ L 148, 30.6.1995, p. 52.

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(5 June 2001)

The Commission is aware that the Luxembourg authorities carry out, as required by Article 8 of Council Directive 91/628/EEC on the protection of animals during transport(1) as amended by Directive 95/29, checks on the compliance with the rules of the Directive by livestock transporters using roads in Luxembourg. The Commission has been informed by the Luxembourg authorities of a number of incidents where Netherlands transporters have been found to be in breach of certain obligations under the Directive, notably in respect of failing to respect the correct loading densities.

The Commission has intervened on a number of occasions with the Netherlands authorities about the matter. In respect of a recent incident the Netherlands authorities have admitted that an official veterinarian in the Netherlands responsible for loading controls did on one occasion allow more animals than permitted to be loaded. The Netherlands authorities have stated that following this incident official veterinarians have been reminded of the correct procedures to follow. The Netherlands authorities have also indicated that on another occasion a transporter may have illicitly placed further animals on a lorry after official controls were completed.

The Netherlands authorities have also accepted in principle that some of the facts recently brought to their notice could justify withdrawal or suspension of licences in accordance with Article 12 of the Directive. However, it appears that to be able to proceed this far the Netherlands authorities would require official documentary evidence relating to the infringements. So far those authorities have not indicated precisely to the Commission the exact nature of the documentation required.

The Commission is aware that a number of transporters are alleged to have committed multiple infringements. As these incidents may result in penal proceedings in the competent national courts the Commission must at the present time refrain from further comment on this aspect.

The co-operation between the Commission and the two Member States mentioned by the Honourable Member has been generally adequate, although the Commission would encourage a more determined follow-up to complaints in the field of animal welfare and stricter implementation of existing Community legislation.

In relation to missions by the Food and Veterinary Office (FVO) the position is as follows:

- The Netherlands was last visited on this issue in 1995 and it was planned to carry out a further mission in the first six months of 2001. The current Foot and Mouth disease situation in the Netherlands makes it unlikely that this mission will be completed in the near future.

- The findings of a mission carried out in Denmark in 1995 demonstrated no major compliance problems and a further mission was therefore not necessary in the intervening years.

(1) OJ L 340, 11.12.1991.