WRITTEN QUESTION P-0941/01

by Cristiana Muscardini (UEN) to the Commission

(19 March 2001)

Subject: Unequal treatment in the livestock crisis

In order to tackle the BSE crisis, the Commission has proposed that ITL 2 000 billion be set aside for 14 EU Member States. It has also decided that cattle herds in which there have been cases of BSE should be slaughtered, to varying extents from country to country. This has spread panic amongst both breeders and consumers and given the impression that the Commission is blindly groping in the dark.

Given that the transmission of the disease to humans appears to have been scientifically ruled out, does the Commission not consider the destruction of vast swathes of livestock to be both pointless and harmful? What are the scientific grounds for its decision?

How can it consider the appropriation of ITL 2 000 billion for 14 countries to be adequate, when in 1995 it earmarked 6000 billion for Great Britain alone, without managing to curb the epidemic, which since then has spread to the rest of Europe?

Given the high number of animals slaughtered because of BSE and foot-and-mouth disease, why does the Commission not consider allowing the free transfer of milk quotas between Member States, to counterbalance the growing milk production shortages by increasing the percentage of imported milk?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(17 May 2001)

Scientists believe that there is a very close link between bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) and the human disease known as new variant Creutzfeldt-Jacob disease, although no direct causal relationship has yet been demonstrated.

At the moment, there is no Community rule in force that would make it compulsory to slaughter an entire herd when a case of BSE has been diagnosed. For the time being, each Member State applies its own policy.

When considering the draft Regulation on BSE(1), Parliament introduced an amendment in the provision for eradicating the disease, by proposing the slaughter of the entire herd. This proposal for a Regulation is at present undergoing its second reading before Parliament.

At all events, compulsory slaughter of any animals that may have been contaminated either in the original or in the present herd (including descendants) is a necessary measure to ensure that all potentially infected animals are kept out of the food chain.

The Commission would point out that the 2001 budget appropriation for beef and veal has been increased by 971 million, to cover the cost of additional measures linked to the BSE crisis (December 2000 package). The estimated additional costs of the Commission proposal of 13 February 2001 on the common organisation of the market in beef and veal(2) would be 157 million in 2001 and 1 145 million in 2002. This estimate is based on the assumption that consumption would drop by 10 % in 2001 and 7 % in 2002 compared to normal. If the drop were greater, the costs to the Community budget would probably be higher.

On the matter of costs linked to the previous BSE crises, the Commission would point out that there was no expenditure linked to BSE in the 1995 budget (the crisis broke at the end of March 1996). As to Community budget expenditure in 1996 and 1997, costs attributable to BSE (including public aid) were of the order of 1 675 million and 1 830 million respectively. The amounts paid to the United Kingdom were 380 million in 1996 and 780 million in 1997, with the remainder paid to other Member States.

The Commission would stress that the merits of a proposal cannot be judged solely on the basis of its financial impact, but rather on its potential for addressing the problems. Furthermore, the Commission fully intends to comply with ceilings for Heading 1 (Agriculture) as set out in the financial perspective.

It is not feasible to transfer milk quotas between Member States without calling into question the basis of the rules on quotas as laid down in Council Regulation (EEC) No 3950/92. In any case, it is very rare for a Member State's quota to remain unused.

(1) OJ C 45, 19.2.1999, later amended by COM(2000) 824 final.

(2) COM(2001) 87 final.