WRITTEN QUESTION E-3779/00 by Roberto Bigliardo (TDI) to the Commission. Administration of massive doses of antibiotics to calves to speed up fattening.
Date: 2000-12-04
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: animal product, antibiotic, consumer protection, health risk, livestock farming, veterinary legislation

13.11.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 318 E/9

2.

In the year 2000 the following exceptions were applied for blind people:

(cid:129) Austria: total exoneration upon request;

(cid:129) Belgium: total exoneration upon request;

(cid:129) Denmark: reduction to DKK 280;

(cid:129) United Kingdom: reduction to GBP 52 for registered persons.

(2001/C 318 E/010)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3779/00

by Roberto Bigliardo (TDI) to the Commission

(4 December 2000)

Subject: Administration of massive doses of antibiotics to calves to speed up fattening

Is the Commission aware that numerous press articles have for some time been condemning the use of
massive doses of antibiotics and other unspecified drugs to fatten calves more quickly? In March 1999 the
Brussels-based committee of consumer associations, which acts as an advisory body to the Commission,
spoke out against the use of antibiotics as growth promoters for farm animals. The statement was based
on the 1997 World Health Organisation recommendations and those of doctors in 30 countries which
urged the Union to set up a monitoring system to deal with bacteria that were resistant to antibiotics.
According to world experts in the field, the use of antibiotics almost inevitably increases resistance in
bacteria.
In view of this very serious threat to the health of European citizens, what steps has the
Commission taken or will it take to prohibit the inappropriate use of these drugs? If steps have been taken,
which countries have opposed them?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(11 June 2001)

The Commission shares the concerns of the Honourable Member on the need to reduce the risk for human
health derived from antimicrobial resistance. However, as highlighted by the scientific community and by
the Report on antimicrobial resistance adopted by the Scientific Steering Committee in June 1999, the
problem of antibiotic resistance requires a comprehensive control strategy, not limited to a specific sector
such as animal production.

The Commission is aware of press articles concerning use of antibiotics and other substances to speed up
the fattening of farmed animals. The use of antibiotics having growth promoting effects is regulated by
Council Directive 70/524/EEC of 23 November 1970 on additives in feeding stuffs (1). There are still four
antibiotics authorised under this Directive. The Commission is committed to pursue the recommendation
of the Scientific Steering Committee and in particular to phase out the use of agents from classes which
are or may be used in human or veterinary medicine and to make all efforts to replace the antibiotics by
non-antimicrobial alternatives.

In the reports provided by the Member States on control activities carried out in 1999 on animal nutrition,
there is no evidence of major infringements to Community legislation concerning such products. In
addition, the Commission took the initiative to ask the Member States for information specifically on the
implementation of recent bans on the use of antibiotics in animal nutrition. In the replies so far received,
there are no elements to confirm a massive and illegal use of antibiotics.

Concerning the control on other uses of antibiotics in animals such as therapeutic or prophylactic
applications,
information is also requested under Council Directive 96/23/EC of 29 April 1996 on
measures to monitor certain substances and residues thereof in live animals and animal products and
repealing Directives 85/358/EEC and 86/469/EEC and Decisions 89/187/EEC and 91/664/EEC (2). This
Directive imposes the sampling for the detection of residues in accordance with a programme established

C 318 E/10

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

13.11.2001

by the Member States and approved by the Commission and includes additional controls on feedingstuffs
and drinking water. The yearly reports for 1998 and 1999 have not confirmed a massive abuse of
antibiotics.

Although some actions have been already undertaken such as gathering data on the current consumption
of antibiotics in animal nutrition and the requirement to monitor the prevalence of antimicrobial resistance
in target microbial species from animals fed antimicrobial growth promoters, these actions shall be
considered in a more comprehensive strategy. In this respect a Commission communication outlining
a wider action plan is under preparation and will be presented shortly.

(1) OJ L 270, 14.12.1970.
(2) OJ L 125, 23.5.1996.

(2001/C 318 E/011)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3813/00

by John Bowis (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(7 December 2000)

Subject: Export refunds for cattle

Is the Commission aware of the often inhumane treatment of cattle exported live to third countries for
slaughter? Is it further aware that this practice would cease if the incentive of export refunds were limited
to the export of meat and not live animals? Will it bring forward proposals to make this change?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(6 February 2001)

The Commission is aware that breaches of Community legislation in relation to the protection of animals
during transport are still taking place within the territory of the Community. The Commission refers the
Honourable Member to the reply it gave to Written Question E-3765-00by Mrs Maes (1) for more detailed
information.

With regard to the question of the refunds granted on the export of live cattle to third countries, since
1 October 1998, Commission Regulation (EC) No 615/98 of 18 March 1998 (2) has provided a specific
mechanism to ensure that cattle transport for export toward third countries meets the requirements as
regards the respect of the conditions on animal welfare during transport as applicable in the Community.
This measure has created the legal basis for refusing the aid if during the transport up to the first place of
unloading in the country of destination the conditions of Council Directive 91/628/EC of 19 November
1991 on the protection of animals during transport and amending Directives 90/425/EEC and 91/496/
EEC (3) are not satisfied. The Commission is in the process of verifying the implementation by the Member
States of these rules.

On the question of trade in live cattle being influenced by the existence of export refunds, the answer can
only be negative. The experiences gained during several crises, and in particular the first major bovine
spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) crisis in 1996, show that importing countries immediately redirected
their purchases of cattle towards other countries, mostly outside the Community.

The Community has no power to interfere in choices made by third countries to slaughter cattle within
their own slaughtering facilities. It is however worthwhile to refer also to the conclusions adopted by the
Agriculture Council of 20 and 21 November 2000 approving the Commission(cid:146)s proposal for the World
Trade Organization (WTO) negotiations on agriculture and by which the Commission takes the firm view
that in international trade, animal welfare should become a matter of interest for all parties involved. The
Community appears at this moment to be one of only a small minority of members within the WTO to
consider this as an objective in the context of the talks on further trade liberalisation.