WRITTEN QUESTION E-0789/01 by Hiltrud Breyer (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Bullfighting: BSE risk due to failure to comply with Decision 00/418/EC.
Date: 2001-03-13
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Andalusia, animal show, bovine spongiform encephalopathy, bull, consumer protection, food hygiene, veterinary legislation

C 364 E/16

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

20.12.2001

(2001/C 364 E/018)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0789/01

by Hiltrud Breyer (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(13 March 2001)

Subject: Bullfighting: BSE risk due to failure to comply with Decision 00/418/EC

The Community subsidises the breeding of fighting bulls in the context of the 1987 Regulation on
premiums for bulls. The bulls are butchered in the arena in unhygienic conditions, immediately after the
fight, and are then sold for consumption. Instruments are used repeatedly both during and after the fight
resulting in injuries which can cause BSE-infected nerve tissue to spread throughout the animal(cid:146)s body.

The use of these instruments has been prohibited since 31.12.2000 and the meat cannot be sold (Decision
00/418/EC (1)). The use of these instruments also contravenes Directive 93/119/EC (2), which declares that
animals are to be spared unnecessary pain and suffering during slaughtering or killing. As long as the
aforementioned instruments are used and the meat is sold, or not correctly disposed of the resultant risk of
BSE infection cannot be ruled out. Spain does not currently have a sufficient number of rendering plants,
which has led to the storage of large amounts of unsaleable (mechanically deboned) remains of fighting
bull meat in cold-storage depots in Andalusia, for example. It is still unclear how the meat is being
disposed of. (El Mundo of 11 and 14 November 2000, ABC of 16 November 2000).

1. What
bullfighting?

is being done to ensure that Decision 00/418/EC is complied with in the context of

2. What is being done to protect consumers from sales of potentially BSE-contaminated fighting bull
meat?

Is the Commission aware that many of the bulls are drugged with phenylbutazone which,

3.
if
consumed, causes serious damage to consumers(cid:146) health? What is the Commission planning to do about
this?

(1) OJ L 158, 30.6.2000, p. 76.
(2) OJ L 340, 31.12.1993, p. 21.

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(20 July 2001)

is

Protection of consumer health is one of the prime objectives of the Commission. Any potential health risk
relating to bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE)
taken extremely seriously. To this end,
a comprehensive series of Community measures has been put in place. These measures, including those
established by Commission Decision 2000/418/EC of 29 June 2000 regulating the use of material
presenting risks as regards transmissible spongiform encephalopathies and amending Decision 94/474/EC,
also apply to fighting bulls, if the meat of those animals is intended for human consumption. Member
States are responsible for its implementation and enforcement. This is then audited by the Food and
Veterinary Office. Furthermore, according to the information available to the Commission, the specific
methods currently used to kill bulls during bullfights (the (cid:145)descabello(cid:146) or the (cid:145)puntilla(cid:146)) are not considered to
increase the risks to the consumers and are thus not prohibited. The Commission is however continuing to
follow the situation closely and will review the legislation if new scientific evidence becomes available.

As already stated, all BSE related measures taken at Community level to protect the consumer also apply to
fighting bulls. In particular, bulls over 30 months of age killed during the fight and whose meat is destined
for human consumption should be tested for BSE.

Community legislation concerning hygiene of fresh meat establishes that the official veterinarian should
perform an analysis for residues if there is a suspicion at the time of the inspection. Fresh meat with
for human consumption.
residue levels above the permitted thresholds should be declared unfit

20.12.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 364 E/17

In addition, the compulsory monitoring plan carried out annually by the Member States should be targeted
to animals and active substances of special concern. This should include the use of non-steroidian anti-
inflammatory substances referred to by the Honourable Member. The Commission is not aware that many
of the fighting bulls are drugged with phenylbutazone and would like to receive appropriate evidence in
order to decide on proper follow-up.

Finally, the Commission would like to emphasise that, within the framework of the Common Agricultural
Policy (CAP), there is no special subsidy designed to support the breeding of bulls for fighting. However,
Council Regulation (EC) No 1254/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the common organisation of the market in
beef and veal (1) destined to support the beef production does not exclude specifically those bulls which
later appear as being used in bullfights. Livestock farmers decide if and which of their animals (generally
a small number of their bulls) will be used for fighting purposes only when the animals are adult.
Therefore, at the normal age for applying for the beef premium, the fact that an animal will be used for
fighting is unknown.

(1) OJ L 160, 26.6.1999.

(2001/C 364 E/019)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0854/01

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(22 March 2001)

Subject: Taxation levels

Does the Commission believe that any Member State has such a high general level of taxation that a tax
cut might increase revenue through incentive effects?

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(26 June 2001)

Although there is a theoretical possibility that high tax rates result in lower tax revenues and, that,
therefore, a lowering of tax rates leads to increased fiscal revenues, there are no clear indications about the
level tax rates have to reach in order to produce so-called Laffer-type effects (1).

In the joint report on (cid:145)The Contribution of Public Finances to Growth and Employment. Improving Quality
and Sustainability(cid:146), which was submitted to the European Council of Stockholm, the Commission and the
Council, on the basis of the accumulated experience, affirmed that tax cuts are not fully self-financing, and
need to be accompanied with spending reforms. The report considers that the necessary amount of
expenditure reductions has to be gauged by the starting budgetary and cyclical economic position, while
an appropriate balance also has to be drawn between cutting taxes and running down government debt
and/or improving the long-term sustainability of public finances. In addition, the effects of tax reforms also
depend on the degree to which tax cuts target supply side rigidities. In particular, where (cid:145)incentive(cid:146) effects
are concerned, tax cuts targeted to highly distortionary taxes, such as those on labour, especially at the
lower end of the wage scale, may lead to positive effects on investment, employment and growth in the
long run, which may result in higher tax revenues, partially offsetting the negative effects of cutting rates.

(1) Laffer-type effects refer to the possibility that a cut in tax rates could lead to an increase (instead of, as expected, to
a reduction) of tax revenues. However, in the real world, against what was suggested by Laffer, tax cuts are not self-
financing. Other things equal, tax cuts lead to a reduction in tax revenues.