WRITTEN QUESTION E-2194/98

by Outi Ojala (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(14 July 1998)

Subject: Treatment of animals for slaughter in the EU

In Finland it appears that the treatment of animals for slaughter has deteriorated drastically with EU membership. For example in 1997-98 20 % of chickens arriving at the two largest slaughterhouses had to be rejected, whereas in 1994 the figure was only 5 %. The rejection figures for fat pigs and cattle have also risen. The reason for this deterioration in the condition of livestock for slaughter is thought to be the reduction in producer prices - by a half in the case of eggs - as a result of which farms have been cutting corners on animal welfare. For example, the poor condition of hens is thought to result from a shortage of feed when producers have cut their expenditure on fodder.

Another problem with hens is the use of battery units, which in Finland account for 95 % of all hen accommodation. These lead to a further deterioration in the hens' condition. The EU's aid policy also affects the situation. Because aid is allocated to farms on the basis of head of livestock, farmers unnecessarily prolong the suffering of their animals, which are already in poor condition.

1. Is the Commission aware of the problems related to the production of animals for slaughter, and are similar trends emerging elsewhere in the EU?

2. What does the Commission feel about the fact that EU subsidies favour the quantity of animals for slaughter over their quality? Has this matter been discussed in the Commission and does the Commission propose to do anything about it in future? Will these problems remain even after the Agenda 2000 agricultural reforms or have they been taken into account in those reforms?

3. Does the Commission propose to take any measures to prohibit the use of battery cages for hens altogether, or does it even propose to shorten the 2009 deadline significantly? If not, why not?

4. Under Directive 88/166/EEC(1), hens kept in battery cages must inter alia be assured access to sufficient food. Does the Commission consider that this is contrary to the situation in Finland, and if so, what does it propose to do about it? Might the payment of subsidies be made conditional on the recipients' complying with current animal welfare legislation?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(16 September 1998)

1. The Commission is not aware of problems related to the production of animals for slaughter in Finland, or in any other Member State, resulting from reduced producer prices.

2. The Act of Accession for Austria, Finland and Sweden provided for the immediate introduction of common (lower) agricultural prices in these new Member States as of 1 January 1995. Finland reserved the right to grant degressive national subsidies as well as national investment aids to farmers during a transitional period until the problems from the small-scale structure of its agriculture are overcome.

In animal production, degressive national aids are paid on a per head basis in accordance with international agreements. It is not thought that in egg, broiler or pig production payment of these aids has lead to lower quality since the greater part of farmers' revenue still comes from the prices obtained.

In the reform package of Agenda 2000(2) no direct subsidies are envisaged in the three sectors mentioned.

3. The Commission has recently presented a proposal to the Council(3) which lays down minimum standards for the protection of laying hens in various systems of rearing, including cages. The proposal is presently under discussion in the Council and has been sent to the Parliament for an opinion.

The new requirements would, if adopted, apply to newly built or rebuilt systems from 1 January 1999 and from 1 January 2009 for all housing systems. This is a normal transition period. As a general rule under the new proposal hens should be housed in a system which allows nesting, dustbathing and perching. Member States may, however, authorise derogations from dustbathing and nesting in order to permit the use of battery cages, provided that the hens have a minimum area of 800 cm2 each.

4. The Commission does not have any information whether in Finland hens in battery cages receive sufficient food. The minimum standards in the present legislation concerning laying hens in battery cages have to be met independent of subsidies. The national authorities monitor compliance with the food requirements and react if there is any infringement.

(1) OJ L 74, 19.3.1988, p. 83.

(2) COM(97) 2000 final.

(3) OJ C 123, 22.4.1998.