WRITTEN QUESTION E-2099/01 by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Cloning of farm animals for commercial use and insufficient animal welfare legislation.
Date: 2001-07-13
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: animal breeding, animal welfare, bio-ethics, biodiversity, cloning, consumer protection

16.5.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 115 E/33

for € 1,5 million to support the families hosting refugees in Kosovo for more than three months,
support refugees with non-food items, provide basic immunisation to refugee children and strengthen
pre-natal, natal and post natal health services. The programmes will be implemented by United
Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and United Nations Children’s Fund (Unicef). The
total allocation for Kosovo for 2001 is therefore: € 14 million.

ECHO’s phasing out strategy from the Balkans, which started in 2000 with the closure of offices and end
of operations in Croatia and Bosnia & Herzegovina, is based on two parameters: the coverage of the urgent
humanitarian needs and the successful linkage with other instruments who are in a better position to
support a development process. In Kosovo, the humanitarian needs resulting from the Kosovo crisis have
been covered and the development of the Province is strongly supported by the Commission through the
European Agency for Reconstruction. Within the United Nations Mission in Kosovo (UNMiK), the original
UNHCR-led ‘Pillar 1’ dealing with humanitarian issues has also been phased out as needs reduced and were
met by other parts of the interim administration. In this context, ECHO’s intervention in relation to the
Kosovo crisis will be finalised this year and the ECHO office will be closed. ECHO will continue
monitoring the situation and following up the implementation of remaining projects related to the
refugees from fYROM from its office in Skopje.

With regards to the drawing up of a comprehensive Commission plan to support
the
humanitarian response is ; with the current conditions in fYROM ; an essential, but limited, part of
such plan. Also in anticipation of the implementation of a much larger comprehensive assistance package,
the Commission mobilised, in May 2001, € 2,5 million from the Rapid Reaction Mechanism for the repair
and reconstruction of houses affected by the conflict, as a confidence building measure in support of the
local authorities’ efforts to alleviate the consequences of the fighting on innocent civilians, no matter their
ethnic background.

fYROM,

The Commission also intends to assist fYROM in the implementation of the Framework Agreement
concluded between the political leaders of the country on 13 August 2001. Preparations are ongoing for
the provision of additional support
local
infrastructure development and confidence-building measures (1). Further macrofinancial assistance may
also be disbursed, and the Commission will organise a Donors’ Meeting, with the World Bank, when
adequate implementation of the Framework Agreement has taken place.

from the CARDS programme for housing reconstruction,

(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 2666/2000 of 5 December 2000 on assistance for Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina,
Croatia, the Federal Republic of Yougoslavia and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, repealing Regulation
(EC) No 1628/96 and amending Regulation (EEC) No 3906/89 and (EEC) No 1360/90 and Decisions 97/256/EC
and 1999/311/EC ; OJ L 306, 7.12.2000.

(2002/C 115 E/032)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2099/01

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(13 July 2001)

Subject: Cloning of farm animals for commercial use and insufficient animal welfare legislation

1.
Is the Commission aware of the report in the ‘New Scientist’ of 19 May 2001 concerning the cloning
of prize farm animals? Is it aware that in the United States, cloning companies are making multiple copies
of top pedigree cows and bulls, and that prize breeding animals can be cloned, in some cases, for less than
half the price of buying one produced by traditional methods?

2.
Is the Commission aware that, in the opinion of numerous experts, it is vital that controlled farm
trials of cattle cloning for food production are carried out before any commercial production is allowed?

3.
Is the Commission further aware of the dangers accompanying the loss of genetic diversity which
would result from the creation of herds of cloned cattle, with unforeseeable results in terms of illness and
consequent increases in unnecessary suffering, as well as adverse commercial effects for farmers? Is it aware

C 115 E/34

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

16.5.2002

of the fact that, for every apparently viable and healthy cloned animal, large numbers are stillborn or
develop deformities, and that even those cloned animals which appear healthy may not be so, given the
insufficiency of research and experience in this area?

Is the Commission aware of the article, published in the journal ‘Theriogenology’ (vol 51, p. 1451)
4.
and referred to in the above ‘New Scientist’ article, which gives details of numerous failed cloning attempts
which resulted in badly deformed and sick animals?

Does the Commission agree that, under the circumstances mentioned above, the protection provided
5.
(to consumers) by the Novel Foods Directive and that provided (to animals) by existing animal welfare
legislation are insufficient?

Does the Commission agree that the process of cloning as referred to in this question should be
6.
confined to experimental laboratories operating under the strictest conditions and that its products should
be excluded form the commercial market until we know all the consequences? Does the Commission agree
that a new directive is necessary to this effect?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(26 October 2001)

The protection of farm animals is a priority for the Commission.

The Commission is indeed aware of progress in cloning technology as applied to farm animals, and the
potential significance of such technology both from the point of view of the welfare of farm animals, and
consumer considerations, as well as the possible future effects on the economics of animal selection.

In particular, it is well known that at the current stage of the development of this technology the risks of
failure, and of suffering to the animals should they survive to birth, are still high.

In its opinion No 9 on the ethical aspects of cloning techniques published on 28 May 1997, the European
Group on Ethics says that:

cloning of farm animals may prove to be of medical and agricultural as well as economic benefit. It is
acceptable only when the aims and methods are ethically justified and when it is carried out under
ethical conditions … including: ; the duty to avoid or minimize animal suffering since unjustified or
disproportionate suffering is unacceptable …

The Group stipulates also that attention should be paid to the need to preserve genetic diversity in farm
animal stocks as well as the public’s right to protection against risks and to adequate information.

Cloning when done for scientific purposes falls within the scope of Council Directive 86/609/EEC of
24 November 1986 on the protection of animals used for experimental and other scientific purposes (1).
The Directive is scheduled for a revision during which specific welfare problems resulting from cloning
will be taken into consideration.

Community rules already exist in respect of the protection of animals on farms, during transport and at
the time of slaughtering. These rules are regularly reviewed. Furthermore a number of significant new
initiatives, which will improve current measures, are already under discussion or planned. The Community
is also party to the European Convention for the protection of animals kept for farming purposes and to
the European Convention for the protection of animals at slaughterhouses.

In particular, Council Directive 98/58/EC of 20 July 1998, concerning the protection of animals kept for
farming purposes (2) provides that no animal shall be kept for farming purposes unless it can reasonably be
expected, on the basis of its genotype or phenotype, that it can be kept without detrimental effect on its
health and welfare. In addition it is also provided that breeding or breeding procedures which cause or are
likely to cause suffering or injury to any of the animals concerned must not be practiced.

16.5.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 115 E/35

In addition to animal welfare provisions, Regulation (EC) No 258/97 of the Parliament and of the Council
of 27 January 1997, concerning novel foods and novel food ingredients (3) provides for the protection of
consumer health. Novel foods and novel food ingredients may not be placed on the market unless they are
authorised. Pursuant to Article 1.2 (f) foods and food ingredients to which a new production process will
be applied, are subject to a full safety assessment,
if their nutritional value, metabolism or the level
undesirable substances is affected.

(1) OJ L 358, 18.12.1986.
(2) OJ L 221, 8.8.1998.
(3) OJ L 43, 14.2.1997.

(2002/C 115 E/033)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2159/01

by Salvador Garriga Polledo (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: Measures to prevent abuses during introduction of the euro

(19 July 2001)

In the run-up to the introduction of the euro, the main fear among European consumers is that it will lead
to higher prices.

The major concern is that the changeover to the euro will lead traders to increase their prices when
rounding up decimal figures and the fear of being cheated continues to spread.

Does the Commission agree that, in order to calm such fears among consumers during the next stage of
the European currency, it should advocate codes of conduct on this question, including coercive measures,
so that consumers can use the new currency without anxiety and without worrying about possible offences
that some traders might attempt to commit?

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(8 October 2001)

The Commission shares the Honourable Member’s views. It was for this reason that it promoted the
signing on 2 April 2001 at euro-zone level of a voluntary pledge by traders’ representatives not to take
advantage of the changeover to the euro to bring in price rises by the back door and to do everything
possible to ensure that their prices remain stable overall when they are converted into euros. The
‘New currency, stable prices’. Transposal measures or similar
agreement
agreements have since been adopted in Spain, France and Italy. The euro-zone-wide agreement can also be
implemented without the need for national transposal measures. More generally, the Commission is closely
monitoring the issue of price stability and contributing to the discussions of the Eurogroup on the subject.

includes a shared slogan:

Coercive measures can only be used to penalise the violation of the conversion rules applicable throughout
the euro-zone in cases of dual pricing. Traders are and will remain free to determine their own prices. It
will be up to consumer associations to denounce any excessive discrepancies which may occur so that they
can be penalised by the market.

(2002/C 115 E/034)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2187/01

by Bernard Poignant (PSE) to the Commission

(23 July 2001)

Subject: Censorship at libraries

Books are the crucible of our history. They serve to prevent people forgetting the past, to develop cultural
diversity and to foster open-mindedness, all of which are good reasons for ensuring that everybody has
access to them. It is therefore important that libraries’ collections and the works they contain should be
varied. Complete impartiality and neutrality should be their hallmarks.