WRITTEN QUESTION E-2280/01 by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Case of BSE in Greece.
Date: 2001-07-31
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU law, Greece, bovine spongiform encephalopathy, database, health control, labelling, national implementing measure, traceability

16.5.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 115 E/53

Past Community controls affected all the regional employment offices. The reports have always been
5.
transmitted to the Dutch authorities. The Commission does not object that the Dutch government provides
the Members of the Dutch Parliament with access to these reports. However, for those reports that have
not been adopted, the Commission will decline any responsibility for damage done to third parties as a
result of this release. The Commission is also prepared to give Members of the Parliament access to these
draft reports under the same conditions.

6.
Irregularities in the use of Structural Funds might happen in all Member States. In the Netherlands
systematically evidence for a sufficient level of co-financing could not be provided. The nature of this
problem concerns large parts of the ESF assistance which explains why the reclaimed sums turn out to be
so high. In the framework of the implementation of the ESF in the Member States, this kind of pervasive
problem is rare.

The Dutch ESF case is very complicated. Thousands of projects have to be controlled and that
7.
inevitably takes a long time. The Commission has no plans to interfere directly. The Article 24 procedure
for the years 1994-1996 that was started is based on a Dutch control report. Also for the years 1997-
1999 the Netherlands must present control reports that will allow the Commission to close financially the
1994-1999 programming period before the end of June 2002.

8.
The Commission attaches high importance to the publication of the report by Mr Koning and it
intends to study it carefully. However, concerning the financial follow up, the Commission will primarily
base itself on the official control reports of the Dutch Ministry of Social Affairs.

(1) Article 24 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4253/88 of 19 December 1988,

laying down provisions for
implementing Regulation (EEC) No 2052/88 as regards coordination of the activities of the different Structural
Funds between themselves and with the operations of the European Investment Bank and the other existing
financial instruments, OJ L 374, 31.12.1988.

(2002/C 115 E/056)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2280/01

by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(31 July 2001)

Subject: Case of BSE in Greece

In early July 2001 the first case of BSE appeared in Greece; it was not possible to certify the origin or
identity of the animal concerned for lack of data on the part of the competent Greek authorities.

Can the Commission, on the basis of Article 3(1)(c) of Directive 90/425/EEC (1), Articles 14 and 18 of
Directive 64/432/EEC (2), Directive 92/102/EEC (3) and Article 4 of Regulation (EC) 1760/2000 (4), explain
why the competent Greek authorities were unable to ascertain the origin and identity of the animal in
question? Has Greece complied with the provisions of Regulation (EC) 1760/2000 and the above
directives? Has it established an electronic database, and if so when? What stage has the national system
for the identification and registration of bovine animals reached in Greece?

(1) OJ L 224, 18.8.1990, p. 29.
(2) Special Edition series I (63-64. p. 164.).
(3) OJ L 355, 5.12.1992, p. 32.
(4) OJ L 204, 11.8.2000, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(11 October 2001)

According to the report of the Greek authorities on the first case of bovine spongiform encephalopathy
(BSE) in Greece, major deficiencies were encountered with regard to the identification and registration of
the bovine animals present on the affected holding. As a result of these deficiencies it was not possible to
establish the identity and origin of the infected animal.

C 115 E/54

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

16.5.2002

Hence in the case described by the Greek authorities, the Community rules laid down in Article 3(1)(c) of
Council Directive 90/425/EEC (1), Article 5(2) of Council Directive 92/102/EEC (2), and Article 4 of
Regulation (EC) 1760/2000 (3) have not been complied with.

As regards Council Directive 92/102/EEC it must be noted that experience and notably the bovine
spongiform encephalopathy crisis had shown that
for
identification and registration had not been entirely satisfactory and needed further improvement. Hence
the existing provisions for identification and registration of bovine animals were reinforced with the
adoption in 1997 of Council Regulation (EC) No 820/97 of 21 April 1997 establishing a system for the
identification and registration of bovine animals and regarding the labelling of beef and beef products (4).
These provisions have been carried over in Regulation (EC) No 1760/2000.

the implementation of

the existing rules

The Greek authorities have informed the Commission that double ear-tagging and passports for bovine
animals were introduced in 1999 and have demonstrated the identification of bovine animals to the
Commission during inspection missions.

The obligation of Member States to set up a computerised database was introduced in 1997 as part of the
reinforced system for the identification and registration of bovine animals. The computerised database shall
be set up in accordance with Article 14 of Council Directive 64/432/EEC (5) and become fully operational
no later than 31 December 1999. Greece was one of several Member States not able to meet this deadline.

The Greek authorities have informed the Commission that the bovine database has been installed and is
currently being tested. Entry of data will commence October 2001 and is expected to be completed by
June 2002.

(1) Council Directive 90/425/EEC of 26 June 1990 concerning veterinary and zootechnical checks applicable in intra-
Community trade in certain live animals and products with a view to the completion of the internal market.

(2) Council Directive 92/102/EEC of 27 November 1992 on the identification and registration of animals.
(3) Regulation (EC) No 1760/2000 of the Parliament and of the Council of 17 July 2000 establishing a system for the
identification and registration of bovine animals and regarding the labelling of beef and beef products and repealing
Council Regulation (EC) No 820/97.

(4) OJ L 117, 7.5.1997.
(5) Council Directive 64/432/EEC of 26 June 1964 on animal health problems affecting intra-Community trade in

bovine animals and swine.

(2002/C 115 E/057)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2284/01

by David Martin (PSE) to the Commission

(31 July 2001)

Subject: Foie gras A force feedings of ducks

In its 1999 recommendations concerning domestic geese and ducks, the Council of Europe’s Standing
Committee of
for farming purposes
recommended that until new scientific evidence on alternative methods and their welfare aspects is
available, the production of foie gras should be carried out only where it is current practice.

the European Convention for the protection of animals kept

Does the Commission know if foie gras is being produced in any places where it was not current practice
at the time of the Council of Europe’s 1999 recommendation?