WRITTEN QUESTION E-0505/04 by Jan Mulder (ELDR) to the Commission. Use of meat-and-bone meal in animal feed.
Date: 2004-02-24
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: animal feedingstuffs, bovine spongiform encephalopathy, cereal substitute, competition law, consumer protection, food safety, health risk, import (EU), surveillance concerning imports, veterinary legislation

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/419

The above disposal outlets used in Spain are in line with the current Community health rules concerning
animal by-products not intended for human consumption in Regulation (EC) No 1774/2002 of the
Parliament and of the Council of 3 October 2002 (2), and do not contravene the provisions of the current
feed ban in Regulation (EC) No 999/2001 of the Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 laying
down rules for the prevention, control and eradication of certain transmissible spongiform encephalo-
pathies (3).

(1) MEMO/01/378 of 20.11.2001.
(2) OJ L 273, 10.10.2002.
(3) OJ L 147, 31.5.2001.

(2004/C 84 E/0489)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0505/04

by Jan Mulder (ELDR) to the Commission

(24 February 2004)

Subject: Use of meat-and-bone meal in animal feed

In the European Union, the use of meat-and-bone meal as animal feed is banned, even if it is derived from
healthy animals.

In 2004, do the grounds on which the ban was originally based still apply, even in the case of feed

1.
for omnivores?

Can the Commission guarantee that animal products exported to the Community from third

2.
countries are not derived from animals which have been fed with meat-and-bone meal?

If the answer to question 2 is negative, does this constitute fair competition? Is the Commission

3.
concerned about the possible impact on public health in the European Union?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(24 March 2004)

1.
The high number of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) cases arising after the introduction of
a prohibition against using mammalian proteins in feed intended for ruminants in 1994 indicated a
significant degree of contamination between ruminant feed and feed intended for other species and
containing these proteins. Therefore, a prohibition on the use of animal proteins in the feeding of all
farmed animals was necessary.

if non-ruminant proteins are being used in feed,

It has also proved necessary to ban the use of non-ruminant protein in feed for control reasons.
In particular, analytical methods to differentiate ruminant from non-ruminant proteins in feed are not
it is not possible to detect the
available. Therefore,
presence of potentially infected ruminant proteins. The current extended feed ban can only be reconsidered
when methods detecting heat treated species specific proteins are validated. Such methods are currently
not available and therefore the arguments to keep the extended feed ban are still applicable. The
Commission continues to provide financial resources to support research on such methods (Stratfeed
project, ring trials in 2003 and 2004).

2.
The import of animal products derived from animals fed with animal proteins in third countries is
not prohibited. This is because the prohibition to use processed animal proteins in feed for non-ruminants
from
is a control measure aimed at preventing the spread of BSE to ruminants in the EU. Meat
non-ruminants having been fed processed animal proteins is not considered to be a human health risk.

3.
The most important measure to protect consumers’ health against BSE is the removal of specified
BSE risk material, such as brain and spinal cord, from food. These measures apply equally to Member
States and third countries. The aim of the feed ban is to eradicate BSE, which has had serious economic

C 84 E/420

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

consequences for the whole EU. Disease eradication measures may need to be applied differently in
different countries depending on the disease situation, without this necessarily being seen as unequal
competition.

(2004/C 84 E/0490)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0507/04

by José Ribeiro e Castro (UEN) to the Commission

(24 February 2004)

Subject: Outermost regions

According to media reports the European Commissioner responsible for regional policy, speaking at a
conference of EU officials from the outermost regions which took place on 28 January 2004 in Brussels,
issued a warning that those regions were likely to lose influence once the Union was enlarged to take in a
further 10 members.

This is a highly disturbing view and it must be taken as a basis for adopting more intensive and more
effective compensatory measures.

According to the same source the Commission is to respond by proposing the establishment of a ‘specific
competitiveness programme’ worth EUR 1 billion to be added to the existing structural funds. This will
enable regional policy to be implemented consistently with a view to fostering sustainable development in
the outermost regions, depending on each region’s shortcomings and degree of economic backwardness.

In view of the above, would the Commission answer the following questions:

(cid:1) What action does the Commission think should be taken by and within each region in order to

prevent or reduce a region’s loss of influence?

(cid:1) Can it say which sectors will mainly be involved in the programme?

(cid:1) How does it intend to apportion the available funding in both percentage and absolute terms?

(cid:1) Does it consider that, in view of the repeatedly stated intention to give priority to achieving genuine
convergence between the regions, the programme in question is sufficient not only to prevent
divergence but also to ensure that the outermost regions are brought up to the EU average in terms of
living standards and quality of life?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(26 March 2004)

On 18 February the Commission adopted the Third report on economic and social cohesion. This
specifically indicates the strategy for the outermost regions:

The Commission intends, within the convergence objective, to set up a specific programme to
compensate for the specific constraints of the outermost regions, as recognised by Article 299.2 of the
Treaty and requested by the European Council of 21/22 June 2002 in Seville. In addition, an action
‘Grand Voisinage’ aimed at facilitating cooperation with the neighbouring countries would be included
under the new ‘European territorial cooperation’ programmes. In accordance with the request of the
Council, the Commission will shortly present a report on an overall strategy for the outermost
regions.

The outermost regions as defined under Article 299 of the Treaty that would not be covered by the
new convergence objective would also benefit from a specific transitional State aid regime setting
limits on aid that would be comparable, initially, to those defined under Article 87.3(a), followed by a
gradual reduction.

We are now preparing the report on an overall strategy mentioned above.

Due for adoption in the immediate future, it sets out to reply to the very questions the Honourable Member
puts.