WRITTEN QUESTION P-3352/01 by Inger Schörling (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Subsidies for stock farming.
Date: 2001-11-27
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU aid, Sweden, aid to agriculture, animal welfare, application of EU law, protection of animals

4.7.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 160 E/93

(2002/C 160 E/122)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3298/01

by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(28 November 2001)

Subject: Withdrawal of EU subsidies on grounds of maltreatment of animals

In Sweden, it has been observed that animal owners who maltreat their animals have nevertheless received
millions in aid from the EU. These subsidies cannot be recalled as the rules for the most common animal
aid do not contain any requirements concerning the treatment of the animals.

Is the Commission considering submitting proposals on criteria for animal care for the payment of
subsidies, or can the Commission propose that the rules on subsidies are linked to national animal welfare
provisions?

(2002/C 160 E/123)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3352/01

by Inger Schörling (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(27 November 2001)

Subject: Subsidies for stock farming

In Sweden, and presumably in other countries, there have been cases in which stock farmers have applied
for and been granted EU subsidies and subsequently have not treated their animals in accordance with the
applicable laws and regulations. Even people who have been banned from stock farming because of
previous maltreatment of their animals have been granted subsidies.

The EU subsidies which are granted for stock farming are allocated regardless of whether the animals are
maltreated or whether the owner has a permit to have animals or not. As long as the owner still has the
animals, the subsidies continue to be paid.

Is the Commission aware of this problem and, if so, what does it intend to do to resolve it?

Has the Commission investigated what proportion of the subsidies paid each year for stock farming goes
to owners who maltreat their animals?

Joint answer
to Written Questions E-3298/01 and P-3352/01
given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(15 January 2002)

The Commission is aware of the problem highlighted by the Honourable Members. It should be noted that
the Protocol on the protection and the welfare of animals annexed to the Treaty of Amsterdam (1)
stipulates that in formulating and implementing the Community’s agriculture policy, the Community and
the Member States shall pay full regard to the welfare requirements of animals.

Payment of aid to individual farmers is done by national administration, as it falls within the competence
of Member States. The Commission therefore does not have any practical action on individual cases.

In the case of written question E-3298/01, since the Honourable Member refers to Community subsidies in
general, the Commission cannot answer in detail.

C 160 E/94

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

4.7.2002

However, in case of direct farming support schemes, several requirements can be highlighted from the
legal basis:

9 First, as concerns Compensatory allowances in Less Favoured Areas, following the provisions in
in order to be eligible for support the beneficiary shall

Article 14(2) of Regulation 1257/1999 (2),
adhere to Good Farming Practice, to be defined by the Member State.

9 Second,

in accordance with Article 3 of Regulation 1259/1999 (2),

in the case of direct support
schemes under the common agricultural policy, it is up to Member States to take the environmental
measures they consider to be appropriate in view of the situation of the agricultural land used or the
production concerned and which reflect the potential environmental effects. These measures may,
among other things,
include general mandatory environmental requirements and specific environ-
mental requirements constituting a condition for direct payments. However, animal welfare is not
explicitly mentioned in the Council Regulation.

9 Finally, and from a more general point of view, indent 11 of Article 33 in Regulation 1257/1999
provides Member States with possibilities to carry out measures in order to improve animal welfare.

(1) OJ C 340, 10.11.1997.
(2) OJ L 160, 26.6.1999.

(2002/C 160 E/124)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3299/01

by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(28 November 2001)

Subject: Aid to Slovakia

Is the Commission hopeful that one or more individuals will be convicted in the courts for fraud in respect
of the Union’s financial aid to Slovakia, and is the Commission hopeful that the financial resources
misused will be recovered and repaid?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(24 January 2002)

At the beginning of April 2001 the Slovak criminal police was informed about the allegations concerning
the Director of the Foreign Aid Department responsible for PHARE coordination and started an assessment
of the case, which is still going on. At the end of this assessment, the Slovak authorities will decide
whether or not to begin a formal criminal investigation.

By the end of April 2001, shortly after being informed about the allegations, the European Anti-fraud
Office (OLAF) initiated an external investigation in the framework of which it provides expert assistance to
the Slovak investigators and facilitates access to information.

The Slovak Supreme Audit Office (SAO) completed an audit of the Slovak Office of the Government for
European Integration which is responsible for the implementation of pre-accession assistance. The
Chairman of the SAO stated that no evidence of misuse of pre-accession funds was found but that the
SAO report revealed serious deficiencies in the process of submitting, evaluating and approving of PHARE
projects in the period 1997-2000 and, that, therefore, scope for possible corruption was created.

If it would appear from the results of the ongoing investigations that pre-accession funds have been used
in a fraudulent or irregular way, the Commission would start the procedure to recover these funds. As a
precautionary measure,
the Commission has temporarily blocked 10 % of requests by the Slovak
Authorities for PHARE payments on the programmes 2000 and 2001.