WRITTEN QUESTION E-0493/01 by Hanja Maij-Weggen (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Supplementary question concerning the illegal processing and selling of cat and dog fur.
Date: 2001-02-22
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: animal skin, hides and furskins industry, international trade, protection of animals

13.11.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 318 E/65

(2001/C 318 E/066)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0493/01

by Hanja Maij-Weggen (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(22 February 2001)

Subject: Supplementary question concerning the illegal processing and selling of cat and dog fur

Further to my Question E-3525/00 (1) on the same subject: Is the Commission aware that inspectors from
the Humane Society, the biggest organisation for the protection of animals in the US, made a discovery of
cat furskin, bearing a different label, during an inspection in Nantes, France in March 2000, and that
a German importer reportedly told the inspectors that an estimated half a million cat furs are exported
annually from Asia to Germany in order to be processed into furskin under a different name?

Is the Commission prepared to contact the Humane Society in the US in order to obtain further
information, and is it prepared,
if this information is confirmed, to submit a proposal for a directive
providing for a ban on the importing, processing and selling of furs from cats and dogs?

(1) OJ C 163 E, 6.6.2001, p. 152.

Answer given by Mr Lamy on behalf of the Commission

(1 June 2001)

The Commission would like to refer the Honourable Member to its answers to Written Question
E-3981/00 from Mr Stevenson (1) and P-0359/01 from Mrs McNally (2).

The Commission is not aware of the specific findings mentioned by the Honourable Member.

Should the Commission receive relevant information from the Humane Society, it would carefully take
note of it and consider it in its further course of action.

(1) OJ C 163 E, 6.6.2001, p. 232.
(2) OJ C 187 E, 3.7.2001, p. 220.

(2001/C 318 E/067)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0494/01

by Jeffrey Titford (EDD) to the Commission

(22 February 2001)

Subject: Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point

I have received many representations from those involved in food preparation,
industry,
restaurants, cafes, etc., about the consequences of the European Commission adopting (cid:145)Hazard Analysis
Critical Control Point(cid:146).

the meat

The case against HACCP is that it is a system which was devised in the United States of America to
produce sterile foods for the space programme and is likely to lead to a reduction in food safety rather
than an improvement.

Have the officials in the European Commission involved in this matter read the analysis by the UK
Independence Party(cid:146)s Research Director, Dr Richard North, entitled (cid:145)Food Safety and the European Union(cid:146)?
If so, what is the Commission(cid:146)s response to the many arguments advanced in that publication against the
introduction of HACCP.

I have received representations from members of the Association of Meat Inspectors who inform me that
HACCP is totally unsuitable for controlling food safety in abattoirs, simply cannot be applied to that
environment and will lead to a reduction in food safety.