WRITTEN QUESTION E-0804/01 by Daniela Raschhofer (NI) to the Commission. Exports of animal meal and imports of beef and veal.
Date: 2001-03-19
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Central and Eastern European countries, beef, bovine spongiform encephalopathy, cattle, cereal substitute, consumer protection, export, health legislation, import

11.12.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 350 E/41

Following the Council(cid:146)s decision to extend to non-ruminants the ban on the use of processed animal
protein in animal feed in order to strengthen the guarantees provided to consumers on food safety, and
following its request for an analysis of the supply of and demand for plant protein, the Commission
submitted two documents to the Parliament and the Council, to which the Honourable Member is invited
to refer:

(cid:129) the first is a working document (5) on the supply of and demand for protein-rich plants in the

Community following the BSE crisis,

(cid:129) the second is a Communication (6) to the Parliament and the Council concerning options to promote

the cultivation of plant proteins in the Community, based on the working document.

A follow-up of the conference on animal protein organised in July 1997 is not foreseen in the current year
2001.

(1) OJ L 210, 7.8.1985.
(2) OJ L 141, 4.6.1999.
(3) COM(2000) 893 final.
(4) COM(1999) 744 final.
(5) SEC(2001) 431.
(6) COM(2001) 148 final.

(2001/C 350 E/042)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0804/01

by Daniela Raschhofer (NI) to the Commission

(19 March 2001)

Subject: Exports of animal meal and imports of beef and veal

From 1 December 2000 the use of meat and bone meal in animal feed has been banned throughout the
EU, since it is seen as a possible source of BSE.

Will the Commission say:

(cid:129) Is animal feed containing meat and bone meal exported to the CEECs? If so, what amounts are

exported to which countries?

(cid:129) How many head of cattle and tonnes of beef and veal are imported every year into the EU from the

CEECs?

(cid:129) How many head of cattle and tonnes of beef and veal are imported into the individual Member States?

(cid:129) What scope does the Commission have to prevent exports of meat and bone meal to the CEECs and
to put an end to imports of beef and veal from the CEECs in order to protect consumers? What
measures does the Commission intend to take in this connection?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(11 June 2001)

Since the entry into force of Council Decision 2000/766/EC of 4 December 2000 concerning certain
protection measures with regard to transmissible spongiform encephalopathies and the feeding of animal
protein (1) on 1 January 2001, exports of animal
feedingstuffs containing meat and bone meal, or
processed animal proteins, and destined for feeding farmed animals destined for human consumption, have
been prohibited.

Prior to the entry into force of this Decision Member States have exported processed animal proteins and
animal feedingstuffs containing these products to almost all Central and Eastern European countries
(CEEC). Whereas the figures for exports of processed animal protein from the Community to CEEC can be
derived from the available statistics, it is difficult to estimate the amount of exports of animal feedingstuffs
containing such products with any precision.

C 350 E/42

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

11.12.2001

In the context of the ongoing scientific risk assessment conducted by the Scientific Steering Committee of
the bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) risk in third countries, known as the geographical BSE-risk
(GBR), the export figures for processed animal protein are being scrutinised for the third countries, having
forwarded a dossier. The outcome of these risk assessments, which include these figures, are made available
on the Internet.

The Commission is sending direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament(cid:146)s Secretariat tables
containing the information requested in her second and third questions (2).

In relation to BSE certain conditions for exports from the Community of meat and bone meal, or
processed animal proteins, are laid down in Council Decision 2000/766/EC. It follows from Article 3 of
this Decision that exports from Member States of processed animal proteins intended for the feeding of
farmed animals for food production is prohibited. This does not apply to milk and milk products, gelatine
of non-ruminants for coating, hydrolysed protein, and fishmeal intended to animals other than ruminants.
Member States may export processed animal protein destined for other use to third countries, provided
a bilateral agreement exists, which includes an undertaking by the third country to respect the final use
and not to export the product, unless incorporated in a product destined for uses not prohibited by the
Decision.

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 (3)provides that
imports into the Community of beef and meat products from 1 April 2001 will be subject to certification
that the products meet the specific Community requirements concerning specified risk material and
slaughter method. The GBR will be the basis for determining for which third countries a derogation from
this requirement can be given.

(1) OJ L 306, 7.12.2000.
(2) Source: Comext (cid:129) Period 1997-1999.
(3) OJ L 158, 30.6.2000.

(2001/C 350 E/043)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0806/01

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

Subject: Unequal treatment of Greek fishermen

(19 March 2001)

In its answer to my question concerning the unequal treatment of Greek fishermen compared with
fishermen from other countries owing to the difference in the range of their exclusive fishing zone, the
Commission stated that this situation arose because Greece had fixed the boundary of its territorial waters
at 6 nautical miles and that the Commission was unable to intervene over the consequences of that fact
(answer No P-0149/01 (1)).

Regardless of whether the Member State or the Commission is competent in this case, Greek fishermen
continue to be unfairly treated because their exclusive fishing zone is less wide. Does such discrimination
constitute sufficient grounds for compensatory aid?

(1) OJ C 235 E, 21.8.2001, p. 129.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(15 May 2001)

The Commission refers the Honourable Member to the answer it gave to his Written Question P-0149/01
on 16 February 2001 (1).