WRITTEN QUESTION E-1567/03

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(8 May 2003)

Subject: Avian influenza epidemic in the Netherlands and Belgium and option of vaccination as an alternative to the wide-scale preventive slaughter of healthy birds

1. Does the Commission recall the major problems with earlier outbreaks of animal diseases, which were tackled by the massive preventive slaughter of healthy cattle and pigs in the vicinity of the centres of infection, after which there was much discussion about better solutions in the future?

2. Is the Commission aware that the current epidemic of avian influenza or bird flu in the Netherlands provinces of Gelderland, North Brabant and Limburg and the neighbouring Belgian provinces of Antwerp and Limburg is once again being tackled by the preventive slaughter of huge numbers of birds?

3. Has the Commission a position on whether stamping out should be done from the centre of infection in the direction in which infection is spreading or from the surrounding area under threat towards the centre of infection, a controversy that has surrounded the way in which the outbreak has been tackled so far? Does the Commission advise Member States to adopt a specific approach?

4. Is the Commission aware of the protest action by the animal rights organisation GAIA against the Belgian Minister for Public Health, on the grounds that vaccination is also a serious alternative for dealing with avian influenza and that a vaccine is available?

5. What is so far preventing the use of vaccination to combat avian influenza instead of slaughter? Is it because of efforts to save costs on the part of the firms concerned or does vaccination jeopardise exports of poultrymeat?

6. What is the Commission doing to help prevent outbreaks of avian influenza in the future by encouraging preventive vaccination or making it compulsory?

Answer given by M. Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(26 June 2003)

Council Directive 92/40/EEC of 19 May 1992 introduced Community measures to be applied in the event of an outbreak of avian influenza in poultry(1). The control is based on immediate reporting of suspect cases, rapid diagnosis and the culling and destruction of all poultry on infected farms. Furthermore strict bio-security measures and safeguard measures are prescribed.

The Directive also foresees that the competent authority may extend the above mentioned measures to other neighbouring holdings should their location, their configuration, or contact with the holding where the disease has been confirmed give reason to suspect possible contamination. This measure is applied on a large scale in the Netherlands as well as in Belgium. Under certain circumstances vaccination against avian influenza may be used to supplement the control measures. A decision on emergency vaccination around an outbreak may be taken by the Member State concerned, provided the fundamental interests of the Community are not jeopardised. Neither the Dutch nor the Belgian authorities have to date introduced such a request to the Commission, except for the vaccination of threatened birds, kept in zoos. The Commission authorised this by adopting Decision 2003/291/EC of 25 April 2003(2).

The report on the vaccination against avian influenza adopted on 27 June 2000 by the Scientific Committee on animal health and welfare (Reference Sanco/B3/AH/R17/2000) recommends that vaccination against H5 and H7 subtypes should not normally be allowed. The possible use of emergency vaccination against viruses of these subtypes as outlined in the Directive should be retained.

However, an infection of vaccinated poultry remains possible. The administration of the vaccine is very labour-intensive, time-consuming and gives only protection after several vaccinations. In addition one should also consider the relative short productive live of poultry. In view of the highly infectious nature and rapid spread of the present virus-type, it does not seem to be plausible that emergency vaccination would prevent the acute spread of the disease in time.

The Commission has up to 12 May 2003 organised eight meetings of the Standing Committee on Animal Health and Welfare, and adopted fifteen Decisions that lay down additional control and safeguard measures after unanimous support by the Standing Committee (with the exception of two abstentions by one Member State). Although the Commission is aware of the controversy in society caused by massive culling of poultry, no valid alternative is at present available.

The Commission has in order to improve future policy, approved under the Fifth (EC) RTD Framework Programme, the research programme Pathogenesis and improved diagnosis and control of avian influenza infections (Project Reference: QLK2-CT-2002-01454). The programme will be concluded in 2005, and aims amongst other objectives to study the development and application of marker vaccines in order to reduce transmission of infection, particularly for their use in densely populated poultry areas.

The Commission intends to evaluate the epidemic, and Directive 92/40/EEC will be amended if appropriate. However, a fundamental change in the control strategy, aimed at the eradication of avian influenza as quickly as possible, is not a valid option at present.

(1) OJ L 167, 22.6.1992.

(2) 2003/291/EC: Commission Decision of 25 April 2003 laying down the requirements for the prevention of avian influenza in susceptible birds kept in zoos in Belgium and the Netherlands, OJ L 105, 26.4.2003.