WRITTEN QUESTION E-0921/04 by Proinsias De Rossa (PSE) to the Commission. Israeli nuclear arms.
Date: 2004-03-26
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU relations, International Atomic Energy Agency, Israel, Middle East, nuclear non-proliferation, nuclear safety, regional security

8.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88 E/717

Transport of the animals to, and unloading them at, the market would be covered if the journey to the
market was more than 50 kilometres but once the animals pass out of the control of the transporter the
Directive does not deal with their situation until loading for the journey from the market commences.

in
The Commission’s proposal for a new Regulation on the protection of transported animals aims,
particular, to extend the protection afforded by Community Law to animals at markets. Personnel handling
animals at markets would have to receive the necessary training. Livestock market operators would be
responsible for ensuring that the welfare of the animals was respected during their stay at the market
including during loading and unloading. Market operators would also be responsible for the introduction
and monitoring of the appropriate procedures to ensure respect of the relevant rules on their premises.

Infringement proceedings were opened against Belgium in the year 2000 in connection (inter alia) with
serious animal welfare deficiencies in relation to loading and unloading of animals at a livestock market.

Following further incidents, Belgium modified its legislation and adopted strict enforcement procedures
including prosecution of those alleged to be responsible for some of the incidents. Following reports of the
Commission’s Food and Veterinary Office (FVO), which indicated an improved situation, the Commission
subsequently decided not to proceed further with the infringement action.

Other incidents concerning alleged mistreatment of animals in markets in some other Member States have
also been brought to the attention of the Commission in recent years but following the intervention of the
Commission’s services, action was in most cases taken to improve the situation. It was not considered
necessary to open infringement proceedings in relation to these incidents.

In relation to the Commission’s general position on initiation of infringement proceedings in relation to
breaches of Community animal welfare legislation, the Honourable Member is referred to the answer given
to written question E-2884/02 of Mr Erik Meijer on 20 November 2002 (3).

(1) OJ L 340, 11.12.1991.
(2) OJ L 148, 30.6.1995.
(3) OJ C 155 E, 3.7.2003.

(2004/C 88 E/0737)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0921/04

by Proinsias De Rossa (PSE) to the Commission

(26 March 2004)

Subject: Israeli nuclear arms

Can the Commission outline its position on Israel’s failure to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and
the lack of scrutiny by the United Nations nuclear watchdog, IAEA, of Israel’s nuclear programme?

What steps are the Commission and Member States taking to create a nuclear-free zone in the Middle East?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(29 April 2004)

Signature of the Non-Proliferation Treaty is on a voluntary basis.

The EU Strategy against the proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction, adopted in December 2003,
reflects the very high priority the Union puts on multilateral non-proliferation and disarmament Treaties
and Conventions. One specific action of the Strategy refers to a diplomatic démarche to foster adherence,
compliance and universalisation of Treaties and Conventions. The EU and the Commission use every
opportunity to recall to Israel the importance of confidence building at regional level.