WRITTEN QUESTION E-2794/00 by Markus Ferber (PPE-DE) to the Commission. EU ban on force-feeding of geese.
Date: 2000-09-04
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: agricultural building, animal welfare, fattening, live poultry, meat product

C 136 E/98

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

8.5.2001

Will the Commission look at the advantages and drawbacks of taking the principles set out in Decision
No 1999/2497/EC of 28 July 1999 (on alternative primary documentation destined for Russia) as a basis
for new primary documentation applicable to countries other than Russia, i.e. ranking equally with the
customs document?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(27 October 2000)

Proof of completion of customs formalities for importation into third countries is given at the exporter(cid:146)s
choice by production of the customs import document or an attestation of unloading and importation
made out by a supervisory agency. The latter option is provided to facilitate matters for exporters, who
may indeed be subjected to pressure by importers in connection with the transmission of the customs
document.

The Decision (1) of 28 July 1999 on proof of arrival at destination of agricultural products exported to
Russia was adopted in the very specific context of persistent malfunctioning of local administration in that
country. This was a temporary decision, recently extended to 30 June 2001 owing to continuation of the
problem.

The Decision states that it is planned to create a system of mutual information transmission between the
Commission and the Russian authorities that would obviate the need for application of the Decision in the
future.

In July an administrative agreement was signed by the Anti-Fraud Office and the State Customs Committee
of the Russian Federation that will permit creation of the system, which ought to give a boost to correct
application of customs procedures in Russia and lead to greater certainty concerning refund payments in
the Community.

The Commission does not at the moment intend to extend provisions of the type contained in the
Decision to exports to other countries.

(1) COM(1999) 2497.

(2001/C 136 E/113)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2794/00

by Markus Ferber (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(4 September 2000)

Subject: EU ban on force-feeding of geese

P(cid:226)tØ de foie gras is a very expensive delicacy and its production requires geese to be force-fed, resulting in
the development of a fatty liver.

The fatty liver represents a pathological change to the liver. With current fattening methods the organ
becomes ten times larger than normal and at the end of the fattening period weighs about 1 000 gms. It is
85 % fat and thus has a very high cholesterol content.

For foie gras to be produced, geese and ducks have to undergo horrific torture. The procedure involves the
animals having a large metal tube pushed down the neck into the stomach several times a day. The
frequent insertion of this tube often causes wounds to the beak and the oesophagus. Hundreds of ducks
and geese are fed one after another in this horrible manner.

Force-feeding is already prohibited in Germany and Austria. However, there is great demand for p(cid:226)tØ de
foie gras in Germany. In 1992, 100 tonnes (equivalent to DEM 15 million in value) were imported from
France, Hungary and Israel alone. Annual world production is about 14 000 tonnes. About 14 million
ducks and geese must therefore be used for the production of foie gras.

Is the force-feeding of geese in any way compatible with animal welfare?

8.5.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 136 E/99

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(24 October 2000)

The Commission requested in 1995 a scientific opinion on the welfare aspects of the production of foie
gras using ducks and geese. The scientific committee on animal health and animal welfare adopted a report
on the question in 1998. This report can be consulted at
the following Internet address: http://
www.europa.eu.int/comm/dg24/health/sc/scah/out17_en.html

The Community is a contracting party of the European convention on the protection of animals kept for
farming purposes (negotiated under the auspices of the Council of Europe). Two Recommendations for the
protection of ducks and geese bred for the production of foie gras were adopted in June 1999 in the
framework of the European convention. The Commission and the Member States actively participated in
the process of the drafting and adoption of these Recommendations. The scientific report above mentioned
was used as a reference for the finalisation of the two Recommendations.

The Recommendations recognise the necessity to keep the birds in social groups and prohibit the use of
the small individual cages which are currently used. This prohibition will come into effect on 31 December
2004 for new or replacement accommodation and for all accommodation on 31 December 2010 at the
latest. The Recommendations also call for further research to develop alternative techniques which do not
require force feeding for the production of foie gras. It has been agreed that until new scientific evidence
on alternative methods and their welfare aspects is available, the production of foie gras shall be carried
out only where it is current practice and then only in accordance with standards laid down in domestic
law.

In the Community, Council Directive 98/58/EC of 20 July 1998 concerning the protection of animals kept
for farming purposes (1) constitutes a legal instrument for the elaboration of future proposals in the field of
animal welfare ensuring the uniform application of the Council of Europe Convention on the same subject
in the Community.

The Directive currently addresses the welfare requirements to be applied for the protection of animals kept
for the different types of production, including the production of foie gras. If necessary, in accordance with
the provisions of Article 5 of Directive 98/58/EC, the Commission may submit to the Council further
appropriate proposals for the uniform application of the above mentioned Recommendations.

However, any such initiative could only be considered in the light of the reports of Member States to the
Council of Europe on the results obtained and measures taken in relation to the implementation of the
recommendations.

(1) OJ L 221, 8.8.1998.

(2001/C 136 E/114)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2798/00

by Jules Maaten (ELDR) to the Commission

(4 September 2000)

Subject: WHO report on undue influence by the tobacco industry

1.
On 2 August the findings of the independent Expert Committee on the Report on Tobacco Industry
Documents and the World Health Organisation (WHO) were published. These findings show that tobacco
companies fought the WHO(cid:146)s tobacco control agenda by, among other things, staging events to divert
attention from public health issues raised by tobacco use, attempting to reduce budgets for tobacco
control, pitting other UN agencies against the WHO, distorting the results of important scientific studies
on tobacco, and discrediting the WHO as an institution. Will the Commission discuss this report in its
High Level Public Health Committee (composed of Chief Medical Officers) to coordinate the Member States
reaction to the report(cid:146)s recommendations?