WRITTEN QUESTION E-3179/00 by Mark Watts (PSE) to the Commission. Report to DG development entitled Livestock sub-sectoral strategy paper.
Date: 2000-10-10
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: animal production, animal welfare, developing countries, development aid, intensive livestock farming

6.6.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 163 E/53

opinion, the Commission has set up two vaccine banks: one with three serotypes for Greece and the other
with just one serotype for south-western Europe.

The Committee also wished to see further research carried out in respect of the vaccine marketed by
South Africa, particularly as regards its use on species for which it was not originally intended (sheep and
goats). Accordingly, the Commission has issued an invitation to tender so that institutes interested in
undertaking this work can submit their proposals. The Committee advocated making public funds available
to promote research on new-generation vaccines. The Commission undertakes to support any well-
founded application in respect of research programmes to facilitate the development and marketing of
a new vaccine without the drawbacks of the diluted vaccine marketed by South Africa. Lastly, the
Commission has approved a major research project
to update the information available on carrier
populations around the Mediterranean rim, which until August 2000 formed the front line of the threat.

The Commission has thus attempted to explore all possible ways of tackling the issues raised by this
alarming and unprecedented epidemic. In cooperation with the Italian authorities, every effort will be made
to deal as effectively as possible with the problems facing Sardinian stock breeders.

To that end, the Commission will assess the impact of the disease on sheep farming. Under Article 21 of
Regulation (EC) No 2467/98 of 3 November 1998 on the common organisation of the market in
sheepmeat and goatmeat (3), exceptional measures may be taken to support a market affected by move-
ment restrictions as a result of steps to prevent an epidemic from spreading.

(1) OJ C 342 E, 30.11.1999.
(2) OJ L 224, 18.8.1990.
(3) OJ L 312, 20.11.1998.

(2001/C 163 E/052)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3179/00

by Mark Watts (PSE) to the Commission

(10 October 2000)

Subject: Report to DG development entitled (cid:145)Livestock sub-sectoral strategy paper(cid:146)

The report entitled (cid:145)Livestock Sub-Sectoral Strategy Paper(cid:146) prepared for the Commission by consultants is
enthusiastic about the intensification of livestock production systems in developing countries, although it
recognises that the more intensive schemes impose constraints on animal welfare.

Does the Commission share this report(cid:146)s enthusiasm for the intensification of livestock production in
developing countries? If so, what measures, policies and instruments does the Commission propose should
be used to ensure that
livestock production in developing countries is not
accompanied by the kind of animal welfare problems which have occurred in developed countries?

the intensification of

Will the Commission confirm that it will not encourage the use in developing countries of systems which
are being phased out by law in the Community, for example, the battery cage for egg-laying hens and veal
crates?

C 163 E/54

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

6.6.2001

Answer given by Mr Nielson on behalf of the Commission

(13 November 2000)

the trend to livestock
For the reasons explained in the draft
intensification is already perceptible, particularly in developing countries where the growth in demand is
strongest. In some regions, intensification of livestock production has translated into development of peri-
urban industrial schemes (mostly in Asia and Latin America), which leads to new constraints on the
environment, human health, social development and also animal welfare.

livestock sub-sectoral strategy paper,

As indicated in the draft paper, the development aid of the Community aims at helping poor small scale
farmers and therefore does not support
industrial animal
production in developing countries. In the livestock sub-sector, Community aid will be directed towards
poor rural communities which draw an important part of their income from livestock farming.

financially the creation or promotion of

Therefore the Commission confirms that it will not encourage in developing countries the use of systems
which are being phased out by law in the Community, for example battery cages for egg-laying hens and
veal crates.

Even if the Commission does not and will not contribute to livestock industrialisation, it will, together with
several Member States and developing countries, the Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO) and the
World Bank, consider animal welfare issues in the framework of the international LEAD (1) initiative. It is
expected that the study to be carried out in Asia and Latin America in the coming months with the
support of the Community environment budget line, as well as other works done by various organisations
on the same subject, will give strategic guidance to both national and international decision-makers.

(1) Livestock, environment and development.

(2001/C 163 E/053)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3185/00

by Anders Wijkman (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(10 October 2000)

Subject: Implications of Regulation 2092/91 for imports of organic produce from developing countries

Regulation 2092/91 (1) erects unnecessary obstacles for developing countries wishing to export organically
grown produce.

Regulation 2092/91 provides for two possibilities whereby organically produced food may be imported
into the EU. Under Article 11(1), the country(cid:146)s rules and inspection system may be approved by the EU in
accordance with a special procedure laid down in detail in Regulation 94/92. The country is then entered
on a list of (cid:145)approved countries(cid:146). The other possibility is based on an exemption (Article 11(6)) lasting until
2005 under which a Member State may authorise imports from a third country which is not on the list of
(cid:145)approved countries(cid:146), provided the importer can demonstrate to the country(cid:146)s authorities that the products
meet the requirements of the Regulation. Applications must therefore be made for separate import licences
in respect of each individual contract.

The bureaucracy involved in issuing licences is incomprehensible to many importers and exporters. The
rules frequently change and are applied differently in different countries. The two issues which seem to be
causing the most problems at present are the uncertainty as to how group-certified goods are to be
assessed, and the requirement of EN45011 accreditation. There are many examples of shipments of
organic produce being severely delayed or held at ports and having to be sold later at lower prices than
conventional products.