WRITTEN QUESTION E-2259/02 by María Sornosa Martínez (PSE) to the Commission. Setting-up of a test monkey farm in Camarles (Tarragona).
Date: 2002-07-24
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Catalonia, agricultural building, animal experimentation, animal welfare, competence of the Member States, health risk, monkey, protection of animals, veterinary inspection, veterinary legislation

C 309 E/214

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

12.12.2002

(2002/C 309 E/246)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2259/02

by María Sornosa Martínez (PSE) to the Commission

(24 July 2002)

Subject: Setting-up of a test monkey farm in Camarles (Tarragona)

The company Centre de Recherches Primatologiques has re-embarked on plans to construct a farm in the
town of Camarles (Province of Tarragona) for breeding African monkeys for use in research centres in
Europe and the USA. Both the regional government of Catalonia and the local council had originally
refused licences for the project, but recently decided to grant them.

Several citizens’ and animal welfare associations have already declared their opposition to the construction
of the farm, which is to occupy an area of 100 000 square metres on the outskirts of Camarles. These
associations argue, among other things, that the breeding of monkeys on farms contravenes various animal
welfare laws, that the species of monkey to be bred might constitute a risk for the local population by
carrying viruses such as ebola (many airline companies, for example, already refuse to carry this type of
monkey) and that according to authorities in the field, there was a risk of the monkeys bred at the farm
becoming intermixed with monkeys of irregular origin, since direct exportation from Africa was a complex
matter, and this would make it possible to acquire European certificates of origin for such monkeys.

The EU Treaties advocate ensuring improved protection and respect for the welfare of animals as sentient
beings (1), and it should be borne in mind that, as the regional government of Catalonia itself recognises,
the prospective farm is to breed and supply animals for experimental purposes and would therefore be
governed by Directive 86/609/EEC (2).

Have the Spanish authorities furnished the Commission with information concerning the proposed
monkey farm in Camarles, as is required under Article 22 of Directive 86/609/EEC for all animal
experiment activities conducted on Community territory?

Can the Commission guarantee that the farm has been authorised under the terms provided for in
Article 13 of that Directive?

Does the Commission not feel that it should launch an investigation to verify that the plans submitted for
authorisation provide details of the relevant measures to be taken pursuant to Articles 5 and 7 of the above
Directive with regard to the general care and accommodation of animals?

Would the Commission be prepared to intervene with the Spanish authorities in order to halt construction
work on the farm if it proves not to fulfil the criteria set out in Directive 86/609/EEC?

(1) See the Protocol on protection and welfare of animals, annexed to the EU Treaties.
(2) OJ L 358, 18.12.1986, p. 1.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(4 September 2002)

Article 22 of Council Directive 86/609/EEC of 24 November 1986 on the approximation of
laws,
regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States regarding the protection of animals used
for experimental and other scientific purposes, provides for measures to avoid duplication of experiments.
The information to be provided to the Commission in this regard concerns administrative and legal
practices governing animal experimentation. The Directive does not require notification to the Commission
of planned breeding establishments.

Article 13 of the Directive sets the conditions for the collection of statistical data on experiments using
animals and is therefore not relevant here. However, Article 15 provides that breeding and supplying

12.12.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 309 E/215

establishments shall be approved by, or registered with, the authority and comply with the requirements of
Articles 5 on care and accommodation of animals and Article 14 on education and training of personnel
involved in animal experimentation. The Commission has no reason to assume that these provisions are
not being met.

According to the Directive,
responsibility of
indication that the competent Spanish authorities do not sufficiently carry out this control.

the control of breeding establishments for experimental animals is the
the national competent authorities. The Commission has so far not received any

The Commission considers that there is currently no basis for a Commission investigation. However, the
Commission would be grateful for information about possible infringements of the Directive in the above
context, which the Honourable Member may have.

(2002/C 309 E/247)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2273/02

by María Valenciano Martínez-Orozco (PSE) to the Commission

Subject: Status of complaint No 2000/5137

(24 July 2002)

With reference to complaint No 2000/5137 lodged with the Internal Market Directorate-General
concerning non-fulfilment in the field of public procurement, could the Commission indicate the stage
reached in the complaint proceedings?

Has the Commission received any kind of reply from the Spanish authorities in response to the formal
notice issued?

What specific measures will the Commission take in order to resolve this matter and thereby ensure
compliance with Community legislation?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(4 September 2002)

On 17 July 2002, the Commission decided to send Spain a reasoned opinion (Article 226 of the EC Treaty)
adjudging that this Member State had failed to meet its obligations under Community law when awarding
two
a public works and services concession for the construction, maintenance and exploitation of
connections of the A6 motorway with Segovia and Ávila, and for the maintenance and exploitation of the
Villalba-Adanero section of the same motorway.

The Commission has in fact discovered that the concession contract contained new and important features
which did not appear either in the concession notice or in the administrative specifications and which had
not therefore been given adequate publicity. The infrastructure works not initially provided for concern, in
particular, the construction of a new reversible lane (including a new tunnel) between San Rafael and
El Valle de los Caídos, the construction of new lanes on two other sections (cid:1) one of them toll-free (cid:1) and
the construction of a new tollgate area, as well as other works.

In view of the foregoing, the Commission considers that the procedure for the award of the concession in
question was not conducted in compliance with the principles of transparency and equal treatment laid
down by the EC Treaty and set out in the provisions of the Community Directives on public procurement.

Pursuant to Article 226 of the EC Treaty, Spain has two months after receipt of the reasoned opinion in
which to respond. If there is no response, or if it is unsatisfactory, the Commission may decide to refer the
case to the European Court of Justice.