WRITTEN QUESTION E-0801/01 by Klaus-Heiner Lehne (PPE-DE) to the Commission. BSE controls and imports of Argentinian beef.
Date: 2001-03-19
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Argentina, beef, bovine spongiform encephalopathy, import, veterinary inspection

C 350 E/38

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

11.12.2001

Answer given by Mr Lamy on behalf of the Commission

(14 May 2001)

In September 2000, the Community requested the establishment of a World Trade Organisation (WTO)
panel on Section 211 of the 1998 United States Omnibus Appropriations Act.

It is important to note that Section 211 does not deal with the issue of the expropriation of trademarks or
other intangible or tangible assets by the Cuban Government. Section 211 only deals with American
trademarks, i.e. trademarks registered in the United States itself. Ownership of such trademarks could not
have been affected by the confiscations operated by the Cuban authorities in Cuba, as the American courts
have never recognised any effects of Cuban expropriations on the ownership of assets located in the
United States.

Section 211 applies to situations where the (cid:145)original(cid:146) American trademark (i.e. the trademark held by the
owner of the expropriated Cuban trademark) has ceased to exist, e.g. for lack of renewal by its owner, or
where such a right has never existed in the United States. It disallows any transaction related to the
registration and renewal in the United States of trademarks where a Cuban national, or Cuba, has an
interest, taking away (cid:129) over time (cid:129) existing American trademarks from their lawful owners, as they will
no longer be able to renew the trademark registration. Section 211, moreover, prohibits American courts
from enforcing any such American trademark in the United States on the request of a Cuban national or
any foreign successor-in-interest. In other words, it deprives the trademark of any practical value because
a trademark cannot be enforced in any other meaningful way than through recourse to the Courts.

The Community considers that Section 211 entails a denial of trademark rights, which is in breach of
several provisions of the WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Intellectual Property Rights. The Community(cid:146)s
WTO case is in the interest of all Community holders of an American trademark legally acquired directly
or indirectly from a Cuban owner, which are potentially affected by Section 211.

The Community has already made its views known to the panel, both orally and in writing. The second
and last hearing before the panel took place on 7 March 2001. The panel is now examining the case and
is expected to rule on the issue by May 2001.

(2001/C 350 E/040)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0801/01

by Klaus-Heiner Lehne (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: BSE controls and imports of Argentinian beef

(19 March 2001)

Against the background of the BSE crisis, increasing quantities of Argentinian beef are being imported into
Europe.

This gives rise to the following questions:

1. Are such imports of beef from Argentina previously tested for BSE?

2. Does the Commission insist vis-(cid:224)-vis the Argentine authorities on a BSE test?

3. What animals are in general tested for BSE in Argentina?

4.

5.

Is it the case that imports of beef from Argentina do not normally previously undergo a BSE test?

Is it the case that in previous years European animal meal products have been imported into South
America, including Argentina?

6.

If that is the case, to which South American countries have animal meal products been exported?

11.12.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 350 E/39

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(21 June 2001)

Currently no tests are available to detect bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) in the meat itself.
Testing is carried out on animals. The rapid tests used in the Community are capable of detecting BSE
affected animals in the clinical phase of BSE or close to the clinical phase, when applied to the brain or
spinal cord after the death or slaughter of the animal. These tests have a valuable role in ensuring that
animals in the late stages of incubation of BSE do not enter the food chain. However, they are not able to
detect infection in the early stages.

With regard to the aspect of human health, it is clear that the removal of specified BSE risk material
remains the key measure. The Commission cannot over-emphasise the importance of effective removal of
these specified risk materials.

However, the conclusion of the geographical BSE risk (GBR) assessment carried out by the Scientific
Steering Committee for Argentina was that it is highly unlikely that domestic cattle in Argentina has been
infected with the BSE-agent. As a result, Argentina has therefore been exempted from the requirements
laid down in the Commission Decision 97/534/EC of 30 July 1997 on the prohibition of the use of
material presenting risks as regards transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (1).

So far, no third country exporting to the Community has been required to carry out systematic BSE testing
as an export condition. The need to require such testing in the future will be examined in the framework
of a further harmonisation of the import conditions pursuant to the proposed Regulation of the Parliament
and of the Council laying down rules for the prevention, control and eradication of certain transmissible
spongiform encephalopathies (2). The BSE risk in the exporting country, the most appropriate way to
manage that risk and the international standard will have to be taken into account. Currently the
international standard does not recommend BSE testing as a trade condition.

As regards testing of animals already carried out in Argentina, a BSE surveillance system was established in
1992 to determine the prevalence of BSE in the livestock population. Testing has been carried out, mostly
on cattle over 24 months, but also on sheep, goats, deer and lamas. Between 1992 and 1999, 4 453
samples have been examined, out of which 680 were from animals with suspect clinical signs; all were
negative with regard to BSE.

No exports to Argentina of processed animal protein from the Community have been recorded in the
Statistical Office of
trade (Nimexe)
databases since 1980.

the European Communities (Eurostat) and Statistics on external

Exports to the South American countries, that have already been assessed by the Scientific Steering
Committee with regard to their geographical BSE-risk (Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Paraguay and
Uruguay) of (cid:145)flours, meals and pellets made from meat or offal, greaves, not fit for human consumption(cid:146),
have been very small in the last 20 years. In the GBR terminology they have been negligible.

(1) OJ L 216, 8.8.1997.
(2) OJ C 258, 10.9.1999.

(2001/C 350 E/041)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0803/01

by Hiltrud Breyer (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(19 March 2001)

Subject: BSE crisis: liability and compensation issues and measures by the Commission

1.
Is the Commission aware of any instance of criminal proceedings being initiated or claims for
compensation being made against the producers of animal feedingstuffs owing to irregular production
procedures either in the EU or elsewhere? If not, how does it view the fact that no criminal proceedings
have been initiated against them?