WRITTEN QUESTION E-1989/02 by Karl-Heinz Florenz (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Import of dogs from Spain to Germany — the leishmaniases.
Date: 2002-07-08
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Germany, Spain, animal disease, domestic animal, epidemiology, import restriction, transport of animals, veterinary legislation, zoonosis

C 309 E/184

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

12.12.2002

Eurostat, with the support of the Central Statistics Office of Ireland, has analysed the Retail Intelligence
report, and has the following reservations:

1. The prices were collected only in Dublin and St. Tropez. These places are unlikely to be representative

of the two countries.

2. The prices were collected in only one retail outlet in each country. Price collection, however, should

be done in a representative sample of all retail outlets.

3. The basket of 40 goods is much too small to represent the full private household consumption
expenditure pattern of a country. The comparable and representative basket used in the official data
co-ordinated by Eurostat includes over 500 food and drink items alone. Furthermore, the weights in
the basket chosen by Retail
Intelligence are unrepresentative of Irish consumption patterns. For
example, the basket includes expenditure of about 41 % on food and non-alcoholic beverages and
about 44 % on alcoholic beverages. Actual Irish private household expenditure on these categories are
about 14 % and 3 % respectively.

Generally, when comparing individual items in specific shop local demand and supply conditions can
lead to large price differences across countries and sometimes even inside countries. However, when a
larger basket is compared and local expenditure patterns are taken into account the price differences
across countries are usually much smaller.

4. The high share of alcohol in the basket (cid:1) about 15 times more than the average private household
spent on it in Ireland (cid:1) is a main reason for the overstated price difference between France and
Ireland, as alcohol
is considerably more expensive in Ireland than in France, due especially to
differences in taxes and duties.

The price difference between Ireland and France in Eurostat’s PPP data has been supported by a
pilotproject last year using electronic data from supermarkets to compare prices of individual brands
across countries. Although this study does not ensure representativity of the basket compared it
ensures a very high degree of comparability by focusing on well known international brands available
throughout the union. Information from this study has been published in ‘Consumers in Europe’ from
Eurostat and in the Internal Market Scoreboard No 10.

(2002/C 309 E/213)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1989/02

by Karl-Heinz Florenz (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(8 July 2002)

Subject: Import of dogs from Spain to Germany (cid:1) the leishmaniases

There were recently outbreaks of sandflies at 11 locations in Germany. This insect is a carrier of
leishmaniasis (Mediterranean disease) and poses a potential threat of infection for vertebrates and humans.
There is a real risk of the disease being transmitted when dogs suffering from leishmaniasis are brought
from the Mediterranean region, particularly from Spain, to Germany, so that stray dogs may be placed
with families there.

Is the placing of animals subject to any particular legal requirements, which are possibly not being
complied with in full?

Are there any legal requirements for bringing dogs from the Mediterranean region to central Europe, or
from Spain to Germany, which:

(cid:1) prohibit the large-scale transport of up to 50 animals per load?

(cid:1) prohibit the export of dogs suffering from leishmaniasis?

12.12.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 309 E/185

(cid:1) require vaccinations against the Mediterranean animal diseases (cid:1) leishmaniasis, ehrlichiosis, babesiosis,
dirofilariasis, microfilaria or borreliosis (cid:1) before any dogs may be brought from southern to central
Europe?

(cid:1) require dogs to be castrated, vaccinated and wormed before a possible transport?

(cid:1) oblige carriers to ascertain where the dog will be accommodated at its destination (dogs’ home or

family)?

Is the Commission aware of the problem of leishmaniasis?

Does it plan to establish specific import criteria in the immediate future which restrict, or even prohibit,
the import of sick dogs from the Mediterranean region to central Europe on health grounds?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(20 September 2002)

The Commission is aware that Leishmaniosis is endemic in the coastal regions of the Member States of the
Mediterranean basin. This is the result of a combination of local ecological parameters which suit the
vector populations (phlebotomus sandflies) and enable the disease to persist.

The disease is thus basically dependent on a favourable ecosystem and cannot very easily take hold and
persist outside regions where the conditions are right
therefore, despite
considerable movement between the Mediterranean and the north of the country, cases of Leishmaniosis
contracted outside the area where it is endemic (lower Rhône valley and coastal regions) are still sporadic.
As far as the Commission knows, the disease has not taken hold in other regions removed from its present
front, as a result of movements of infected animals.

for its cycle.

In France,

Any current expansion of the endemic area has probably been brought about by general climate warming,
which enables the vectors involved in the cycle to cover a larger area.

The risk of Leishmaniosis encroaching on new areas as a result of movements of living animals is,
therefore, still very slight.

Introducing veterinary measures to reduce this risk further would, in the view of the Commission, be out
of proportion. Without a vaccine, the only possible strategy would be to prohibit movements from the
endemic area or conduct individual serological checks followed by quarantine. This would not stand up to
a cost-benefit analysis of the problem.

(2002/C 309 E/214)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2014/02

by Eluned Morgan (PSE) to the Commission

(9 July 2002)

Subject: Structural funds

The rules for managing structural funds in Member States can be complex and cumbersome. At what point
will we see the same changes that have been implemented in the Commission being transferred to Member
States in relation to structural funds? Will the system of structures of responsibility that are now in place at
the top (i.e. the Commission) be used to reform the way funding is implemented and monitored on the
ground (i.e. at Member State level)?