WRITTEN QUESTION E-1627/03 by Jan Mulder (ELDR) and Toine Manders (ELDR) to the Commission. Financial consequences of avian influenza for hatching-egg producers.
Date: 2003-05-13
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: State aid, agricultural holding, aid to agriculture, animal breeding, animal disease, animal plague, egg, financial loss, insurance, support policy

C 70 E/54

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

20.3.2004

cases, pursuing these findings with the authorities in the United States. In addition, the Commission has
requested Member States to carry out an increased level of testing on egg products, of both Union and
third country origin, for banned substances. Member States already have to carry out on a routine basis
sampling in the egg sector, mainly to check for banned substances, in accordance with the provisions laid
down by Council Directive 96/23/EC (1) and Commission Decision 97/747/EC (2).

Discussions have taken place with the Member States in the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and
Animal Health and the situation will continue to be closely monitored, especially in the light of the results
of the increased testing requested by the Commission. The Commission especially took the opportunity to
remind Member States to sensitise all producers and traders of egg powder to the need to apply hazard
analysis and critical control points (HACCP) to their activities and to consider as a critical control point the
control of residues in the raw/starting materials. From a general point of view, Community legislation
imposes a series of health and supervisory requirements, designed to ensure that imported animals and
products meet standards at least equivalent to those required for production in, and trade between,
Member States. Directive 92/118/EEC of 17 December 1992 (3) lays down the health conditions for the
import of eggs and egg products. According to its provisions, these products must come from a third
country appearing on the list provided for in Part VIII of Commission Decision 94/278/EC (4). In addition,
they must fulfil the conditions laid down in Commission Decision 97/38/EC of 18 December 1996 setting
specific public health requirements for imports of egg products for human consumption and be
accompanied by a health certificate referred to in that Decision (5).

Furthermore, in accordance with the provisions laid down by Council Directive 97/78/EC, of 18 December
1997, laying down the principles governing the organisation of veterinary checks on products entering the
Community from third countries (6), each consignment of eggs and egg products intended to be imported
from the United States into one of the Member States, must undergo a documentary, an identity and a
physical check,
including possible laboratory checks, to verify if the products offer the same level of
consumer protection required by the relevant Community legislation.

(1) Council Directive 96/23/EC of 29 April 1996 on measures to monitor certain substances and residues thereof in
live animals and animal products and repealing Directives 85/358/EEC and 86/469/EEC and Decisions 89/187/EEC
and 91/664/EEC, OJ L 125, 23.5.1996.

(2) Commission Decision 97/747/EC of 27 October 1997 fixing the levels and frequencies of sampling provided for by
in certain animal

Council Directive 96/23/EC for the monitoring of certain substances and residues thereof
products, OJ L 303, 6.11.1997.

(3) Directive 92/118/EEC of 17 December 1992 laying down animal health and public health requirements governing
trade in and imports into the Community of products not subject to the said requirements laid down in specific
Community rules referred to in Annex A (I) to Directive 89/662/EEC and, as regards pathogens, to Directive
90/425/EEC, OJ L 62, 15.3.1993.

(4) Commission Decision 94/278/EC of 18 March 1994 drawing up a list of third countries from which Member States

authorise imports of certain products subject to Council Directive 92/118/EEC, OJ L 120, 11.5.1994.

(5) OJ L 14, 17.1.1997.
(6) OJ L 24, 30.1.1998.

(2004/C 70 E/057)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1627/03

by Jan Mulder (ELDR) and Toine Manders (ELDR) to the Commission

(13 May 2003)

Subject: Financial consequences of avian influenza for hatching-egg producers

Avian influenza has now spread to several Member States, resulting in major financial problems for the
sector.

Holdings which have been cleared receive compensation under European rules. Regrettably, that does not
apply to hatching-egg producers.

20.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 70 E/55

In the vast majority of cases, producers are unable to market their eggs as hatching eggs; rather, they can
sell them only as eggs for consumption, which have a much lower market value.

1.

Does the Commission see any way of supporting producers who have been badly affected?

How, more specifically, does the Commission view the possibility of establishing rules for buying-in

2.
hatching eggs?

How does the Commission intend to deal

in the longer term with the serious economic and
3.
secondary harm to those indirectly hit by such outbreaks of animal diseases? Is the Commission prepared
to consider setting up largely privately funded systems to insure against such losses throughout the
European Union?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(18 June 2003)

1.
The Netherlands may obtain a financial contribution from the Community, by means of veterinary
funds, of 50 % of eligible expenditure for the compensation of farmers for the compulsory culling of
animals and the compulsory destruction of eggs under eradication measures related to outbreaks of Avian
Influenza.

The Member State concerned, under National Aid Scheme can establish a buying-up policy related to
2.
poultry and eggs in restriction zones, provided that such scheme comply with community rules for
national aid in agriculture.

3.
The Commission has already emphasized insurance policies as a potential mean to deal with indirect
losses caused by large outbreaks of animal diseases. A study supported by the Commission is currently
being finalized on this issue.

(2004/C 70 E/058)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1628/03

by Eija-Riitta Korhola (PPE-DE) to the Council

(14 May 2003)

Subject: Promoting fair-trade products in the EU

During Fair Trade Week, which begins on 3 May, campaigners in Finland will draw attention to fair-trade
products and seek to persuade members of churches, among others, to increase their use of fair-trade
coffee.

In reply to my written question P-3856/02 of 24 January 2003 (1), Commissioner Pascal Lamy wrote:
‘In the long run, however, only a sustained trend of increased demand for fair trade products by European
consumers is likely to lead to large reductions in prices [of fair-trade products].’

Has the Council considered or does it intend to consider possibilities of promoting demand for fair-trade
products by publicising European Fair Trade Week (3-9 May) in the Member States?

Will the Council promote demand for fair-trade products by means of public procurement in the Member
States?

(1) See page 26.