WRITTEN QUESTION E-0373/03 by Torben Lund (PSE) to the Commission. Animal welfare and consumer information.
Date: 2003-02-13
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: animal welfare, consumer information, domestic animal, hides and furskins industry, import restriction, labelling

C 242 E/124

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

9.10.2003

(2003/C 242 E/127)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0373/03

by Torben Lund (PSE) to the Commission

(13 February 2003)

Subject: Animal welfare and consumer information

The European Union is facing a flood of cat and dog fur items in the form of toys, clothing, lining and
homeopathic treatments, all of which are mislabelled, not labelled or made to appear as faux fur or other
fur.

Now that 10 Agriculture Ministers of the EU have asked the Commission to ban this consumer fraud
under internal market considerations, would the Commission please state why it continues to ignore this
and claim it cannot do anything about animal welfare concerns, when the Ministers have clearly stated
they want consumer fraud tackled and it is an internal market crisis?

(2003/C 242 E/128)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1145/03

by Charles Tannock (PPE-DE), Generoso Andria (PPE-DE),
John Bowis (PPE-DE), Chris Davies (ELDR), Jean Lambert (Verts/ALE)
and Lennart Sacrédeus (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(1 April 2003)

Subject: The trade in cat and dog fur

The Commission has been made aware that animal welfare organisations have provided evidence of
extraordinary cruelty in certain Asian countries regarding the killing of cats and dogs for their fur, which is
then exported to other countries including the European Union. This involves on occasion the hanging
and skinning alive of these animals and other appalling acts of cruelty. The fur is often substituted illicitly
for other types of fur or even sold as artificial fur.

Fur produced from any animal within the European Union must be obtained in a manner which is
consistent with the requirements of Council Directives 93/119/EEC (1) and 98/58/EC (2). These Directives
insist on a respect for the welfare of animals which is clearly absent from the treatment of cats and dogs in
countries such as China.

In response to Written Question E-1203/02 (3) by Mr Whitehead, Commissioner Byrne states that:

Since a complete ban on the production, use, trade and import of those furs (cid:1) as imposed by certain
Member States (cid:1) would apply regardless of the conditions under which the animals are kept and
killed, it is evident that such measures are not motivated by solely animal welfare concerns. The
motivation is primarily an ethical question, whether to use products derived from animals which are
mainly regarded as companion animals.

The Commission has already explained in its answer to Written Question E-3981/00 (4) that a ban on
importation of cat and dog fur that was not accompanied by a ban on internal EU trade in such items
would probably fall foul of W.T.O. rules. Therefore, to be W.T.O. compliant, any ban on importation of
these products would have to be accompanied by a total trade ban within the EU itself. Given that a
complete ban of this kind is the only way to prevent such appalling cruelty, on what basis does the
Commission say it is evident that a desire for such a ban is not motivated by solely animal welfare
concerns? Moreover, does the Commission not accept that a desire to prevent cruelty to animals, quite
separate from any desire not to use products derived from companion animals, can be seen as an attempt