WRITTEN QUESTION P-1386/02 by Patricia McKenna (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Trade in horses.
Date: 2002-05-06
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: animal welfare, equidae, health control, health legislation, illicit trade, live animal, traceability, transport document, veterinary inspection

C 229 E/212

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

26.9.2002

(2002/C 229 E/244)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1386/02

by Patricia McKenna (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(6 May 2002)

Subject: Trade in horses

A trade in live horses has been operating on an ongoing basis between Ireland and the UK. It appears that
this trade operates outside the law and flouts EU rules on live animal transport. Indeed, while officially
horses need passports or ID Marking sheets to travel out of the state, in this case only a welfare certificate
is issued at the exit port.

Is the Commission aware of this live export trade of horses for slaughter between Ireland and the UK and
was this the subject of an investigation by a Food and Veterinary Office (FVO) team in the past?

Has the Commission issued warnings to Ireland for failing to comply fully with the transport of live
animals directive and would the Commission investigate this matter and send an inspection team as soon
as possible?

Would the Commission penalise Ireland for failing to comply with EU law on this aspect of the live animal
transport directive?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(10 June 2002)

With reference to the questions raised by the Honourable Member, the Commission would like to draw
attention to Council Directive 90/426/EEC of 26 June 1990 on animal health conditions governing the
movement and import from third countries of equidae (1), as last amended by Commission Decision 2002/
160/EC of 21 February 2002 (2).

In accordance with Article 8 (1) second indent of that Directive, equidae (other than registered equidae, i.e.
equidae for breeding and production and equidae for
slaughter), must be accompanied during
transportation by an animal health certificate complying with the model in Annex C to that Directive, as
amended.

In accordance with Article 6 of Directive 90/426/EEC Member States may grant each other derogations
from the provisions of the second indent of Article 8 (1), i.e. certification, on a reciprocal basis, provided
that an alternative control system is implemented which provides guarantees equivalent to those laid down
in Article 4 (5), which refers to holdings freedom from specific diseases, as regards the movement within
their territory of equidae and registered equidae, in particular by means of identification documents.

The Commission is aware that such derogations are applied for movement of equidae between the
‘tripartite countries’ France, Ireland and United Kingdom, and that in particular no certification of the
In
animal health status is required for equidae moving between Ireland and the United Kingdom.
accordance with Commission Decision 2000/68/EC of 22 December 1999 amending Commission
Decision 93/623/EEC and establishing the identification of equidae for breeding and production (3) all
equidae must be accompanied during their movement by an identification document, and in particular if
destined for slaughter. The latter is a requirement to ensure proof that veterinary medicinal treatment had
not been carried out by use of unauthorized medicinal products.

Where Member States grant each other the derogation provided for in Article 6 of Directive 90/426/EEC,
the measures must be applied without prejudice to the animal welfare requirements laid down in Decision
2002/298/EC (4), i.e. certification of fitness to travel.

Furthermore, in the case of movement of equidae other than registered equidae from one Member State to
another, the movement must be recorded in the computerised Animal Movement information system
ANIMO, in order to ensure the traceability of the animals concerned.

26.9.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 229 E/213

Movement of equidae between Member States has not been a specific subject of a veterinary inspection
mission of the Food and Veterinary Office (FVO). However, the last FVO mission to Ireland on the subject
of animal welfare during transport
(Council Directive 91/628/EEC of 19 November 1991 on the
protection of animals during transport and amending Directives 90/425/EEC and 91/496/EEC (5)) took
place in March 1999 (see report XXIV/1491/98 available on Directorate General for Health and Consumer
Protection’s website)6 (6).

The FVO plans to carry out a follow-up mission to Ireland on the same legal basis in the second half of
2002. In addition, the Commission services in charge of public and animal health and animal welfare will
inquire with the competent authorities of the United Kingdom and Ireland on the controls carried out
within the framework of Council Directive 90/426/EEC and will report the findings directly to the
Honourable Member of the European Parliament.

(1) OJ L 224, 18.8.1990.
(2) OJ L 53, 23.2.2002.
(3) OJ L 23, 28.1.2000.
(4) OJ L 102, 12.4.2001.
(5) OJ L 340, 11.12.1991.
(6) http://europa.eu.int/comm/dgs/health_consumer/index_fr.htm.

(2002/C 229 E/245)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1438/02

by Maurizio Turco (NI) to the Commission

(15 May 2002)

Subject: Information concerning the partnership between the EU and ‘EU-Student Vote’ in connection with

the election of a ‘European Student Council’

The pilot project ‘EU-Student Vote’, www.eusv.org,
is organising the first on-line European election
between 9 and 23 May, to enable millions of European students to elect the first ‘European Student
Council’, which will represent students in the European institutions.

One of the electoral lists, the ‘European Antiprohibitionist Students’, www.easyvote.tk, points out, in a
reasoned report, the fact that because of the mechanisms used there is a real danger of false registration,
there are no guarantees that those who vote will be entitled to do so and the lists of candidates cannot
necessarily communicate with the electors, which means that the first great experiment in democratic on-
line voting will actually be off-line and undemocratic.

Following this complaint, the ‘European Antiprohibitionist Students’ list has been deleted from the website
and in effect excluded from the election, whilst the forum for discussion between students has also been
cancelled.

Since the European Union is a partner in this initiative, can the Commission say:

D what the terms of the partnership are, i.e. does the Union fund the pilot project ‘EU-Student Vote’ or

one of its partners for a project designed to elect European student representatives;

D whether the European Union has undertaken or intends to give any form of formal recognition, even
if only symbolic, to the ‘European Student Council’ which would be elected in these elections using
the current procedures;

D what forms of control it has exercised or intends to exercise as partner in the ‘EU-Student Vote’

project?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(10 June 2002)

The EUSV project
Commission.

is a private project

that does not benefit

from any financial support

from the

In 2001 the EUSV submitted requests for financial support to the Commission. However, after careful
assessment of the applications, both Directorate General (DG) Education and Culture and DG Information
Society rejected it.