Animal health requirements applicable to the non-commercial movement of pet animals (debate)
The next item is the report by Mrs Bairbre de Brún, on behalf of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety, concerning the draft Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 998/2003 on the animal health requirements applicable to the non-commercial movement of pet animals - C7-0035/2009 -
Mr President, this is the first amended regulation to come before the plenary meeting and the first that comes under the provisions of the Treaty of Lisbon. I would like to express my gratitude to the shadow rapporteurs - Mrs Soullie, Mrs Willmott, Mrs Vălean, Mrs Evans, Mr Nicholson and Mrs Rosbach - for their help during a series of complicated negotiations; and I am grateful for the exceptional support I received from the Parliament's legal services and codecision unit. I would also like to thank the Council and the Commission.
The substance of the Environmental Committee dossier was agreed at the beginning of December, and from the start of this year, we have been dealing with certain aspects relating to how Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union can be implemented with regard to this dossier.
It sometimes seemed that we would never manage to come to an agreement. However, we succeeded. We agreed a solution for this dossier. In doing so, we ensured that pet owners could continue to travel across EU borders with their pets, while including a transitional system that allows certain Member States to apply stricter controls, depending on disease, for a period of eighteen months.
The proposed amended regulation recognises the progress that has been made hitherto. To ensure that the rabies situation in the EU improves from here on, the transitional system will be extended in five Member States until 31 December 2011 - by that time, provisions relating to the non-commercial movement of pets will be the same all over the EU. It is recommended that the transitional system should also be applied in relation to tapeworms (Echinococcus multilocularis) and ticks until 31 December 2011.
As regards the new procedures which take the place of the committee's procedure, the Commission should be empowered under this regulation to adopt delegated acts under Article 290 of the treaty, through which the European Parliament and the Council delegate to the Commission the power to adopt non-legislative acts which have general application in order to add to or amend non-essential elements.
For example, in order that diseases other than rabies may be contained - diseases that could increase as a result of movements of pet animals - the Commission could adopt preventative health measures through delegated acts. In the second place, in order to allow for technical progress the Commission could, through delegated acts, adopt modifications to technical requirements with regard to identifying animals; and in the third place, they could, through delegated acts, adopt modifications to technical requirements in relation to anti-rabies vaccinations, in order to allow for scientific and technical developments.
We succeeded in agreeing the wording for all of this and for arrangements relating to the implementation of Article 290 of the treaty in relation to this dossier, and we kept all of this as consistent as possible with regard to the European Parliament's powers under the Treaty of Lisbon.
The agreement at first reading demonstrates how important the urgency of this dossier is to every person who took part.
Finally, I would like to say that the fact that a rapporteur from one of the small groups took on such a complicated dossier with the active cooperation of shadow rapporteurs from other political groups is an important democratic signal and something of which this institution should be proud. I would like, once more, to express my thanks to everyone from the three institutions - the Parliament, the Council and the Commission - who worked unremittingly on this dossier. I hope that colleagues will support this work through their votes.
Member of the Commission. - Mr President, I would like to thank the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety for its work on this dossier. I would especially like to thank the rapporteur, Ms de Brún, for her efforts to reach an agreement on this issue, which is a sensitive one for some Member States. We also appreciate that, apart from the issues involved, she had to steer the process through the difficult part on delegated acts. Thank you very much.
I am pleased that the intense discussions held between the three institutions have resulted in a compromise text that fully reflects the technical measures proposed by the Commission and also addresses the necessary adaptation of the proposals to the Lisbon Treaty in a way that is acceptable to the Commission. Indeed, our joint work has been complicated and slowed down by this alignment. Nevertheless, the Council is now in a position to ensure that this work is finalised on time.
Before a vote is taken on the compromise text, I am pleased to confirm that the Commission does not intend to propose a further prolongation of the transitional regime, which will come to an end on 31 December 2011. This means that fully harmonised rules will be in place from 1 January 2012. However, the Commission does intend to propose a revision of the regulation in its entirety before 30 June 2011 and, in particular, the aspects of delegated and implementing acts.
As regards the notification of delegated acts, the Commission will also take account of the periods of recess of the institutions in order to ensure that the European Parliament and the Council are able to exercise their prerogatives within the time limits laid down in the relevant legislative acts.
Finally, I can confirm the Commission's commitment, jointly expressed with Parliament and the Council, that the provisions of this regulation shall be without prejudice to any further position of the institutions as regards the implementation of Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union or individual legislative acts containing such provisions. I hope Parliament will support the compromise text, which I firmly believe properly addresses all concerns raised by this House.
Mr President, Commissioner, this is a very important report, partly because it looks at how we can make it easier for pet owners in Europe to transport their pets across national boundaries and partly because it deals with preventing the dangerous spread of diseases carried by pets throughout Europe.
As a Swedish Member of the European Parliament, I am particularly interested in this question, because there are two diseases which we fortunately do not yet have in Sweden, the dwarf tapeworm and, most importantly, rabies.
During the discussions on this proposal, I have been concerned on a number of occasions that we would need to amend the regulations we currently have in Sweden and that this would result in the dwarf tapeworm and rabies reaching Sweden. This would have appalling consequences, not least with regard to the way in which we exercise the right of public access to the countryside in Sweden, in other words, our opportunities to roam freely through the woods and fields.
I am very pleased to see today that Sweden will be able to retain its current exemptions, at least for a transitional period, which will allow us to ensure that these diseases do not enter our country.
Throughout the course of the process, we could not take it for granted that this would be the case. Even right at the end, a debate took place in the committee procedure which I, at any rate, was worried would create uncertainty and give rise to a loophole in the application of the procedure that would result in the risk of these diseases reaching Sweden.
I would like to extend my warm thanks to everyone who has worked hard to find solutions to enable pets to be transported across Europe and to ensure that the exceptions in countries where certain diseases are not present could be retained, so that we do not need to be concerned anywhere in Europe that new diseases will be introduced as a result of this proposal. I would like to thank the rapporteur, the Council and the Commissioner.
on behalf of the S&D Group. - Mr President, can I start by thanking Mrs de Brún, who took on this dossier expecting it to be fairly expeditious. It then became very complicated as we found ourselves negotiating whole new delegated acts without precedents for future acts, so congratulations to her and to the Council and Commission. Commissioner, one of your first tasks here is to find a solution.
A lot of the debate has been about the technical aspects of this legislation, but it is an important piece of legislation for lots of citizens, being about moving their pet freely around the EU. When we first adopted this legislation a few years ago, there was a lot of support for it, but we have this transitional period, which Mr Fjellner has mentioned, which is important to prevent diseases spreading to states that do not have those diseases.
I welcome the Commission's support for extending the transitional period so that, when we do have the new legislation, all countries will have the same legislation. We will, by that point, have much higher levels of animal health and animal welfare across the EU.
On the comitology issue, our group supports the compromise that has been negotiated. We think that Parliament should have parity - equality - with the Council in legislation. The whole issue was about the expert groups and who these experts should be. What we would like to say is that when we talk about experts being consulted, this has to refer to all experts, and the Commission will be looking with experts from the Member States, from non-governmental organisations, and also those perhaps which the European Parliament is recommending.
I am very pleased that we have this agreement. It enables the transitional period to be agreed in time for when the derogation runs out, and we look forward to hearing the Commission's new proposals for the future legislation.
on behalf of the ALDE Group. - Mr President, let us recall that free movement has been one of the fundamental pillars of the single European market, which aims to achieve increased competition and larger economies of scale and confers on the EU its main power of attraction. Over time, the ability of people to move freely within the EU has become not only a basic component of the internal market but a fundamental right.
By removing the barriers created by different national provisions and regulations, European citizens, as well as businesses, can thrive. Likewise, the possibility for EU citizens to carry their pets with them, without being subjected to specific national regulations and standards, is important, as it can significantly reduce their travel efforts and costs. I am pleased that the Commission proposal points in that direction.
I welcome the general regime passport, which will harmonise the animal health measures and controls that will facilitate the free movement of pet animals. At the same time, I agree that we need to guarantee a high level of protection for human and animal health. This transitional regime will allow more time for the right infrastructure and staff to be in place. So, under this argument, Parliament will certainly vote tomorrow to prolong the transitional regime for some Member States until the end of 2011, as these countries allegedly need to take specific health risks into account.
However, this is not the first time that some Member States have been allowed to apply more stringent health requirements than others. Initially, the transitional period lasted until July 2008. Then the transitional period was extended to 2010. Now we have agreed to a new prolongation. Thus, while I have some sympathy for the fears of the Member States who consider that their pet population is more prone to certain diseases, and I understand that the proposed prolongation would be simultaneously completed with EU-funded vaccination programmes to eliminate sylvatic rabies in some Member States, I believe that this should be the last extension of the special treatment enjoyed by these countries. We all know that asymmetrical measures and opt-outs will not bring the full benefits of the internal market in this area. So let us all agree that this transitional regime needs to be eliminated and that a level playing field has to be ensured as soon as possible.
Interestingly enough, the more contentious issue in this report has not been the content that has sparked heated debate among us on how to apply the new Lisbon Treaty provisions regarding the comitology procedure. This is the first codecision file where these provisions are to be put into practice. Given Parliament's extended powers under the new treaty, it was crucial for us that this particular regulation did not set a precedent for future decisions.
In this regard, I welcome the written statement which was agreed between Parliament and the Council during the trialogue, stating that this file should not be treated as a precedent.
on behalf of the ECR Group. - Mr President, first of all, let me begin by thanking the rapporteur for all her hard work on this report. What many of us felt at the beginning would be a dossier which would not cause us much of a problem turned out to be an awful lot more tricky than we thought.
Unfortunately, the rapporteur had to take the brunt of most of the negotiations, but she certainly had to work very hard to ensure this report got through within the necessary timeframe, which was very important as we were under pressure to secure the extension of her derogation which was due to run out in June of this year.
In my opinion, this is a small but vital piece of legislation which will protect those areas and those countries that are concerned by the threat of rabies; the disease continues to occur in some parts of the EU, and hopefully by the end of 2011, vaccination programmes will have proved successful in eradicating the disease once and for all.
Until then, however, we have found a way which allows us to continue to enforce our own stricter requirements under the transitional period before we move, in line with other EU Member States, to the general regime.
Mr President, I would like to thank Mrs de Brún for the excellent job she has done on updating this technical regulation on travel with pet animals within the territory of the EU. Many ordinary families find it a challenge to complete all the vaccinations and paperwork required for all the members of the family to go on holiday together. It is necessary, however, because some countries are fighting a hard, long-fought battle against uncontrollable animal diseases. Various measures have been taken: quarantine of varying lengths, double-checking with vets both before and after travel depending on the destination country, expensive compulsory vaccination of wild animals at national level - to name but a few. I can therefore well understand why some Member States fear any easing of their stringent national regulations, and I consider it necessary that we respect their high safety requirements and would like others to emulate them.
Consequently, I would like to ask the Commission whether it would not be a good idea nonetheless to implement veterinary border controls at which the owner of a pet animal must demonstrate that the animal travelling with him or her is free of dangerous diseases, has been vaccinated and has its papers in order in respect of the destination country. That would also provide an opportunity to check pig and other animal transports that do not meet EU requirements, and the smuggling of puppies and kittens which are far too young could also be exposed by border controls.
(DE) Mr President, Commissioner, welcome to the European Parliament. Ladies and gentlemen, I would also like to compliment the rapporteur who has done a competent job. The document covers many areas. In recent years, we have seen a growth in pets and domestic animals and naturally, also the desire to be able to take these animals with us on trips. That is right and it should be so, as being able to take your pet gives you an increased sense of well-being. For that reason, however, in Europe, we must have regulations to prevent the spread of animal epidemics. We have them. We have very good regulations in Directive 998/2003 and from 2011 we will have the European Vaccination Card, which will accurately document which vaccinations animals have received. Moreover, from 2011, electronic tagging will prevent confusion and deception.
In recent years, we have done a lot to curb animal epidemics in Europe, especially rabies, also through the achievements of the European Commission, which first pushed through and financed the vaccination of foxes. That is a very important matter and we should acknowledge it. These special regulations that are repeatedly approved for some countries are burdens for citizens. Here, the expense bears no relation to the benefit. I have received letters from many citizens complaining of annoying behaviour at borders. Let me just cite the United Kingdom as an example: arriving two days too early in a half-year stay means a EUR 3 000 fine and the animal is quarantined for six weeks. We should consider whether this kind of behaviour is right. Therefore, Commissioner, I think one more year, but then this must end. We have European regulations that apply to everyone. The risk of disease spreading - if the animal epidemic situation remains as it is, we must always presume that - no longer exists in this form with pets and domestic animals.
(DE) Mr President, Commissioner, welcome to Parliament. I would like to join my fellow Member, Mr Schnellhardt, by saying you have a major task in this area, to create genuinely equal conditions in the 27 Member States by 2010 so that household pets can be transported and brought from one country to another without obstacles.
Free movement for dogs and cats was certainly the goal of the 2003 regulation. Now, for the third time, we are making an exception. In the EU, some things take a really long time: ten years to tune such regulations. No country in the EU wants diseases to be introduced and I also wonder why 22 countries accept the idea of dogs and cats being allowed to travel with their owners and five countries do not.
You should examine whether the reality and the obstacles still correspond to these special provisions. I know that there are thorny debates at national level, but we are now one legal space and it is time, by 2011 at the latest, to introduce free movement, the single market for pets. The animal expert, Mr Schnellhardt, has already mentioned the conditions, namely that there is a vaccination card and that instruments like electronic tagging will be used, which will then give you access to the five countries when you are on holiday or travelling to work and wish to take your pets with you.
This regulation on pets will go down in history. It is, in fact, the first legal act since the Treaty of Lisbon and we wanted a level playing field with the Council of Ministers in the empowerment of the Commission for delegated acts. That was an uphill struggle, but it was worth it. My congratulations to Mrs De Brún for this report and, of course, for this procedure to begin a new era. That is why it is so important, because we have perhaps a hundred legal acts in a year, but 6 000 delegated acts, and from this we can gauge how important it is to set the new procedure on the right track from the beginning.
Mr President, I just wanted to say a few words in praise of the legislation we have. I understand it was based upon the United Kingdom's pet travel scheme, which was introduced about a decade ago. That helped us reduce dramatically the quarantine regulations we had in our country which had caused much distress to both pets and their owners. I understand the first animal to take advantage of the pets travel scheme was a dog called Frodo Baggins, and after that, many hundreds of thousands of animals have been able to travel more freely.
Then the EU brought in this legislation, following very similar principles, about five years ago, and it has proved a great success. Hundreds of thousands of animals now travel with their owners each year across Europe. I am told that 60% of them happen to be British animals, which may say something about the British character, but we will not go there in this forum. Of course, we have also kept the balance right. The concern was to enable movement without spreading disease, and the reality is that rabies has been kept very firmly under control - 2 700 cases 20 years ago down to less than 300 cases last year, and not one single case associated with the movement of domestic animals under this scheme.
I am somewhat disappointed that ferrets are not moving in the numbers that I originally anticipated. When this legislation was first discussed, many ferret owners in the United Kingdom came to me and asked why this legislation could not include their animals too. They wanted to take them to ferret exhibitions across Europe. The Commissioner is looking surprised, but there was a debate. Apparently you can vaccinate a ferret against rabies but the vaccination does not show, so it was problematic. Eventually, we decided that the incidence of rabies in domestic ferrets was so small that we could include them, but apparently, I am told, there have been relatively few movements. Perhaps one reason why - to answer Jo Leinen's point - is that in some countries, like Portugal, ferrets are still classified as vermin so pet owners are reluctant to take their animals to those countries. It could be worse - it could be China, I suppose.
Commissioner, just to finish, the great advantage to me is that I can now look to my constituents and, when they ask me what the European Union has done for them, I can say that we have made it possible for you to take your pet on holiday - your cat, your dog or your ferret.
Mr President, I understand that the original idea for the creation of pet passports came from the Official Monster Raving Loony Party in the UK, which probably best sums up this dangerous scheme.
My country had a compulsory six-month quarantine period for domestic pets. Under the EU pet passport system, this important bulwark against the spread of disease was summarily removed. The unelected European Commission was able to overrule the democratically elected British Government and introduce a system without a quarantine period that relies on vaccinations and the accuracy of paperwork.
As a farmer, I know something about vaccination. It is by no means a guarantee against animals bringing diseases across borders. The effectiveness of the vaccination can be compromised by many things, including its being administered to an animal that already has the disease it is being inoculated against. Vaccinated animals can also be carriers of the disease without displaying a symptom. Batches of vaccine of varying quality and forged paperwork is a real probability.
I understand there is no standardisation of enforcement of the scheme. Some countries require the formal passport while others will take documentation in any form; still others will not accept the passport as proof of vaccination. Many airlines are unable to provide details of the formal procedures and staff are poorly trained.
In other words, it is an accident waiting to happen. There is a saying in my country, 'If it is not broken, why fix it?' Such advice is wasted on the Commission.
(The speaker agreed to take a blue card question under Rule 149(8))
Mr President, I would just ask the honourable gentlemen, would he not think his tirade against the European Union would be stronger if the British Government had not introduced similar legislation before the European Union did?
Mr President, I think that the European Union has become far too big, has far too many cultures, and I simply do not trust this system at all and it is going to get worse.
Mr President, I welcome the Commissioner and I thank the rapporteur for her work. Just to continue with Mr Agnew's point of 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it', I think that is exactly what we are doing here: we are extending derogations where Member States have asked that that happen, but we are allowing the movement of pets. I am sure those who are in the visitors' gallery thought that it was quite a simple matter to move pets between Member States, but because we are dealing with issues around animal health - and indeed human health - it is not quite so simple. We do need stringent rules and controls on that, while recognising that many British people, but also people from other Member States, like to bring their animals with them.
My worry about this report was that it might get bogged down in the technicalities of life after the Lisbon Treaty which, quite frankly, lots of people outside this Chamber should not worry about, or indeed know about - it was of importance to us as a Parliament. I think the rapporteur has settled the case very well on our behalf and has been congratulated for so doing. The danger was, had it slipped through the net, we would not have had in place measures to address the concerns of Sweden, Ireland, the UK and others. But we are in the right place now.
I think the future is much more important. Commissioner, you mentioned that you have plans to look at new legislation in this regard. I think that is what we should be talking about at this stage. What we all want in this House is high animal and human health standards, and this new legislation that you promise should ensure that.
So, well done to the rapporteur and to those involved in this report in bringing it to the stage it is at today. It has satisfied all concerns - not for all, perhaps, to my extreme left here, but for most of us. I hope you will consult wisely and widely in relation to what we need on new legislation on the transport of pets. We have it with farm animals; we need simplified but effective rules for pets.
(SV) Mr President, the Commission has produced a positive proposal to amend the regulation on the animal health requirements applicable to the transport of pet animals. I am particularly pleased that this will allow us to extend the period during which a number of countries, including Sweden, can retain their stricter regulations relating to rabies and dwarf tapeworm.
The Swedish Board of Agriculture, which is the relevant authority in Sweden, has said that, without the option of special controls, the tapeworm, for example, would probably become established in Sweden. This would have a negative impact on the freedom of access to the countryside, which is an important part of the everyday life of people in a country like Sweden.
I would like to thank the Commission, the rapporteur and the shadow rapporteurs for listening to our requirements and, therefore, making it possible to introduce what is initially a temporary solution.
Mr President, first of all, I would like to thank my colleague, Ms de Brún, for her hard work on this report.
The case of a 38-year-old woman who died in the Royal Victoria Hospital in Belfast last year was a tiny reminder of the ongoing threat posed by rabies to Ireland. It is believed that she contracted the disease when trying to break up a fight between two dogs while on a working holiday to South Africa.
More recently, four people had to receive preventive injections in Dublin after an illegally imported kitten started to act strangely and bit them.
Rabies is one of the oldest zoonotic diseases which affects humans, and is invariably fatal once symptoms have occurred. Global travel patterns mean that the disease is never far from our door.
It is for this reason that Ireland practises strict quarantine of imported animals, and it is only because of these stringent measures that we are able to maintain our status as rabies-free. In order to continue this record, it is crucial that the transitional agreement which this proposal would extend until the end of next year is not allowed to lapse in July 2010.
The additional safeguards proposed are also crucial to both human and animal health, as they would help solve the fight not just against rabies but also against specific ticks and tapeworms from which Ireland is currently free.
By accepting this proposal, this House would facilitate the fight against rabies and provide a base for its eradication across Europe. For these reasons, the urgency of this matter must not go unstated.
(SK) I agree with the amendment to the regulation on animal health requirements applicable to the non-commercial movement of pet animals, which de facto facilitates movement across borders within the European Union.
I would also like to acknowledge the work done by the rapporteur, who has produced a top-quality report, including such measures that would lead to vaccination against rabies and other diseases, as well as further preventive actions. I am convinced that in just taking such a step, we will totally harmonise standards in the European Union's internal market and move toward the so far most extensive elimination of the threat from transmission of these diseases.
However, I am aware of the ongoing risks and the dangers in the transport of animals and, therefore, I support a reasonable extension of the transition periods for Members States such as Malta, Ireland and Sweden, whose internal standards are stricter. This is a prudent approach which particularly stresses prevention and takes the special characteristics of the respective countries into account.
(RO) I would first of all like to congratulate the rapporteur on all her hard work, along with all those who made this compromise possible. I am pleased that the report allows Member States to continue implementing their protection measures against the spread of rabies, and also that it will result in the free and safe movement of pets throughout Europe after 2011.
I think that a good compromise has been achieved, which provides an effective response where Member States have justified concerns about the spread of certain diseases, while also offering the guarantee that when delegated power is used, the Commission will consult a number of experts - from the Commission, Member States, NGOs or from national parliaments.
In a wider context, we have received written assurances that this report will not set a precedent for the use of delegated powers in the future. As a result, consideration will be given to Parliament's concerns about creating a precedent for the new comitology procedure under the Treaty of Lisbon.
(DE) Mr President, the efforts of the European Union to stem or completely eradicate animal epidemics and diseases like rabies are, of course, extremely laudable and it is certainly very positive that measures are being taken to facilitate cross-border tourism with pets.
The European Vaccination Card, vaccination programmes or even the electronic tagging of pets are indeed sensible measures that may make this easier. However - and I know this from our experience in Austria - there are phenomena that threaten this. For example, the illegal smuggling of puppies from cheap Eastern European countries to Central Europe or the European Union repeatedly leads to the introduction of diseases.
The mass transport of animals across the EU, including in Austria, could also allow dangerous diseases to reoccur. Wild animals are furthermore liable to ignore border controls and may, of course, also repeatedly lead to the spread of animal epidemics like rabies. It will be necessary to take measures in this area.
Member of the Commission. - Mr President, I think that we can all be proud of the swift progress made on this file, which has been conducted under extreme time pressures and in a difficult legal context.
The 18-month prolongation of the transitional regime regulating the movement of pets into five Member States will give them the time to adapt to the regime which applies in the rest of the European Union. I have also confirmed that the Commission does not intend to propose a further prolongation of this transition time.
At the same time, it will allow the Commission to prepare a comprehensive proposal aimed at revising the regulation in its entirety and, in particular, bringing the old comitology provisions into line with the spirit and the letter of the Lisbon Treaty.
I have to agree that this is an important file for European citizens, and I am pleased that we have had a successful conclusion.
Mr President, I would also like to welcome Commissioner Dalli to the European Parliament and I also welcome the opportunity to work with Commissioner Dalli. I welcome his statement to the Parliament this evening. As he said, the substance of my report agrees with the approach of the Commission's proposal.
I would also like to express my thanks to everyone who spoke in tonight's debate; most of them in favour of the proposed system, with only a few people in opposition.
The Commission's proposal and my report use a scientifically-based approach. In light of the different situations regarding rabies in Member States, the Commission chose a safe, precautionary approach. It is appropriate that the end of the proposed extension coincides with the period in which it is expected that the European Commission will put an end to EU funding for a vaccination programme aimed at eradicating rabies in wild animals in some Member States.
As Commissioner Dalli and Mrs Vălean said in relation to the proposed date, the structure in place can be changed and the staff that are already there can be retrained. The transitional system will be extended in five Member States until the end of 2011 and by that time, provisions relating to the non-commercial movement of pets will be the same all over the EU. In the meantime, people will be able to cross EU borders with their pets, but the transitional system will be in place to allow some Member States to apply stricter controls during that period.
Again, I would like to express my thanks to everyone who helped with this work. The work was occasionally complicated, but although it was hard, it was worthwhile in the end. Thank you all.
The debate is closed.
The vote will take place tomorrow (Tuesday, 9 March 2010).
Written statements (Rule 149)
in writing. - (CS) The aim of Regulation (EC) No 998/2003 on the animal health requirements applicable to the non-commercial movement of pet animals, which entered into effect on 3 July 2003, was to make it easier for pet owners to travel with their pets. This was to be achieved through the introduction of a passport showing that an animal has been inoculated against rabies, and stipulating the obligation to mark animals in order for them to be clearly identified. The proposed amendment, in addition to making the original regulation more specific in technical terms, again extends the period during which journeys with dogs and cats to Finland, Ireland, Malta, Sweden and the United Kingdom are subject to stricter requirements. The differences in the protective measures of the previously-mentioned Member States, especially the different time-limits for inoculations and serological examinations and the different deadlines for anti-parasite examinations, unnecessarily complicate and increase the cost of travelling with pets in the EU. In practice, this means that a sizeable number of EU citizens will be discriminated against unnecessarily for a further year and a half when exercising their right to free movement between EU countries. The repeated extensions of the time period may indicate that the Commission set the period incorrectly in the original directive, without regard to the actual state of affairs, or that certain Member States were unable or unwilling to implement Regulation 998/2003 on time. In any case, such exemptions do not show an even-handed approach on the part of the Commission to the implementation of general regimes in EU Member States.


Composition of committees and delegations: see Minutes


Corrections to votes and voting intentions: see Minutes


Major natural disaster in the autonomous region of Madeira (debate)
The next item is the Commission statement on the major natural disaster in the autonomous region of Madeira.
Mr President, honourable Members, the Commission is concerned and saddened by the terrible events in Madeira, especially by the high number of victims. I would like to extend my sympathy to all of the inhabitants of Madeira affected by the disaster. The Commission extends its condolences to the families of the victims, in particular.
Yesterday, my colleague, Johannes Hahn, as the competent Member of the Commission, was able to talk to the President of the Autonomous Region of Madeira, Mr Jardim, who said that the situation remains serious. However, the regional and national emergency services have it under control. It does not currently require support from the European Civil Protection Mechanism.
That said, the damage is so severe that Madeira is hoping for financial aid from the EU Solidarity Fund. The Commission is currently examining all possible means for providing EU financial aid to Madeira. Back in 2003, following the horrific fire disaster, we were able to grant solidarity aid amounting to more than EUR 48 million to Portugal. The Solidarity Fund was created in 2002 to be able to provide financial assistance at EU level to Member States affected by serious natural disasters.
However, the mobilisation of the Solidarity Fund is subject to certain criteria being met. The most important prerequisite is the submission of an application for assistance by the Portuguese Government. May I remind you that the Regulation establishing the Solidarity Fund normally only permits mobilisation of the fund for large-scale disasters where the cost of the damage exceeds a threshold of 0.6% of the gross national income of the State affected. For Portugal, this currently means that the cost of the damage must exceed EUR 958 million. However, in exceptional circumstances, and if particular criteria are met, assistance may also be granted for smaller, 'regional' disasters, particularly if one of the outermost regions, like Madeira, is affected. As the Commission does not yet have sufficient information about the extent of the damage, it is still too early to say whether these conditions will be met.
The authorities in Portugal should now carry out a swift and thorough assessment of the damage and submit an application to the Commission within ten weeks. My colleague Mr Hahn will meet with Portugal's Interior Minister, Mr Pereira, this Friday to discuss where to go from here. On 6 and 7 March, Mr Hahn will visit Madeira in order to see the damage first hand. The European Commission's Directorate-General for Regional Policy will be available to provide any support that may be required to help Portugal's authorities to prepare the application.
I would like to remind you that financial aid from our Solidarity Fund is not paid out straight away. The Fund is an instrument to help Member States deal with the financial consequences of disasters; it is not an urgent instrument. The resources for the Solidarity Fund are provided by means of an additional contribution from the Member States over and above the normal budget. It therefore requires the approval of the European Parliament, your approval in other words, and that of the Council, by means of an amendment. The whole process, from the time of the application until the aid is paid out, will take several months. However, we, the Commission, will make every effort to keep the process as short as possible.
The Structural Funds are not available for immediate emergency measures. They may be able to provide some help in connection with the long-term reconstruction. The Commission will discuss the options and possible sensible and necessary programme amendments in the short term with the administrative authorities in Portugal.
I would like to assure you that the Commission will do everything in its power to help the people and authorities of Madeira to cope with this terrible natural disaster.
on behalf of the PPE Group. - (PT) I take the floor in this Chamber today with my voice weighed down with the distress of someone who personally experienced and witnessed the tragedy that struck Madeira last Saturday. Obviously, I join in the feeling of pain and grief that has befallen the families of the 42 victims we now know have died, to whom I offer my condolences and respect for their loss.
The true extent of this disaster has yet to be revealed, given that the search and rescue teams, who have been working without interruption since Saturday in a Herculean effort which I salute, are only now beginning to reach the most isolated populations. It is feared that the number of victims could increase.
The scene is one of large-scale destruction, involving significant material damage to access routes, with roads and bridges totally destroyed, and to essential services such as water and electricity supplies. There are more than 600 displaced persons who have lost their homes and personal possessions. The economic and social impact of this catastrophe is preventing people from returning to a normal way of life. However, it is now necessary to look forwards. We also need to send a message of solidarity, hope and confidence to the people affected. Help needs to be given, and the European Union and Parliament, in particular, have a role to play here, as they are fundamental in the process of mobilising the Solidarity Fund. Whenever we are called upon to intervene, we have to do so promptly because we cannot ask the people affected to wait, especially when they need us most.
I hereby appeal to the Commission and its President, Mr Barroso, and to Johannes Hahn, Commissioner for Regional Policy, in particular. I welcome his plan to visit Madeira shortly, and ask him to take this message of hope, assistance and support for reconstruction, because now is the time to rebuild what nature has unfortunately taken from us once again. I have complete faith that we will do so because, as the anthem of Madeira has taught me, 'the people of Madeira are humble, stoical and brave. They are the people who ploughed the earth among the hard rocks; they are heroes of working in the mountain wilderness. For Madeira, they will honour their history and through their work, they will strive for and attain happiness and glory.'
on behalf of the S&D Group. - (PT) On behalf of the Group of the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats in the European Parliament, I wish to express our condolences to the families of the victims, and show our solidarity with the people affected by the tragedy that struck the Autonomous Region of Madeira, in Portugal, on the 20th of this month. Torrential rain, strong winds and heavy seas rendered the centre of the tourist city of Funchal unrecognisable and left devastation and death in their wake. There has also been great damage to public and private infrastructure, as well as the natural environment and cultural heritage. Initial estimates, Commissioner, suggest that damage will exceed EUR 1 billion, so this will fall within the criteria for the Solidarity Fund. Unfortunately, there are also dozens of dead to mourn, a considerable number of injured and missing people and hundreds of homeless. The images of devastation and suffering have been shown all over the world and no one has remained indifferent. Expressions of solidarity have come from all four corners of the globe.
The European Union and European Commission must also demonstrate their active solidarity with this outermost island region by urgently mobilising the Solidarity Fund, in order to reduce the high social and economic impacts and to help restore normality to the affected area.
I conclude, Commissioner, by asking the following: this Parliament has already approved changes to the Solidarity Fund. Why are these changes not in force? Why are they not being applied?
on behalf of the GUE/NGL Group. - (PT) We began this plenary session today with a minute's silence. This minute's silence had two meanings: firstly, solidarity with the victims of the catastrophe which struck Madeira and their families, and secondly, a tribute to all the workers who have been tirelessly providing assistance to those victims.
However, a minute's silence must make us reflect and also lead us to reflect on things that go beyond our immediate concerns here. What we saw in Madeira is a phenomenon which will occur more and more often. Climate change is causing these extreme events to take place again and again, and we must find ways of responding to them. We are not able to avoid natural disasters but, at the same time, we must not simply allow them always to have such tragic effects on the lives of the people. That is why we must fight for planning and development policies which are directed at the public good. However, I wish to conclude, Mr President, with something that is more important and which has brought us all here: the European Commission, the European Parliament and the European institutions must have the capacity to provide an urgent response to emergency situations. Financial resources and the required swiftness of operation are necessary for this purpose.
(PT) The tragedy in Madeira took many lives, destroyed property and tore through the face of a Portuguese island which was proud of its beauty, which so many visitors from around the world have had the opportunity to see. I suppose no one, not even in Portugal - much less in Portugal, in fact - could have been prepared for the horror of the images that were broadcast into our homes in successive news reports, of people being washed away by the waters, houses caving in, bridges collapsing and an entire landscape being altered by the force of nature.
As can be seen from the statements being made here, despite everything, this is not simply a tragedy which occurred in a region of Portugal. It is a tragedy which violently struck part of the European Union which, in solidarity, should provide assistance without reservation. It should unreservedly help the families of the victims who have died and the people who have suddenly been left with nothing, and it should assist in the reconstruction of the built environment, by restoring to the island of Madeira what nature has stripped away. This, Mr President, is certain: the message of the anthem of Madeira has been mentioned here, but I have also drawn a lesson from the anthem of Portugal, which proclaims, 'heroes of the sea, noble people, brave nation'. These are brave people who, as they have shown on other occasions in their history, have always known how to turn things around during difficult times and how to overcome such misfortunes.
It will happen yet again and, on this occasion, doubtless with the solidarity and help of the whole European Union.
(DE) Mr President, this is certainly not a nice reason for this debate. Madeira has been hit by an unbelievable natural disaster and we extend our condolences to the families affected. The European Union must provide support in this situation. The solidarity of the whole of the European Union is required here and I can only reiterate what has already been said. I urge the Commission to mobilise the Solidarity Fund as quickly as possible so that help can be provided. I would like to ask the Council to ensure that the reform of the Solidarity Fund that Parliament adopted two years ago is finally implemented, because this will make it possible to provide assistance more quickly to the regions affected.
We also need to look to the future. In recent years, Madeira has received a lot of structural fund resources and will also continue to do so over the next few years. These resources need to be used to take preventative action so as to be able to reduce the terrible consequences of natural disasters and therefore also the suffering. This is something that, as the European Union, we need to implement in the regions and therefore also in Madeira.
(PT) The disaster on the island of Madeira requires emergency measures and calls for extraordinary financial assistance to be given to this Autonomous Region. Such assistance should be directed towards the reconstruction of the infrastructure and public amenities which have been destroyed or damaged and should also be made available to people affected by the various aspects of the tragedy, whether economic, social or in terms of the family.
Tragedies are not fair; almost always, those who have the least are those who lose the most. It is important, therefore, to identify and compensate, as far as possible, all those who have lost family members, their homes and their livelihoods. What has happened in Madeira has dramatically shown us the importance of strengthening cooperation and solidarity in the European Union as well as in the area of disaster prevention. It is important at this point to build a suitable financial framework for prevention that strengthens and makes use of mechanisms such as cohesion policy, rural development policy and regional policy, amongst others, in order to assist Member States in the implementation of measures to protect people, the environment and the economy.
Mr President, I would like to express the sorrow felt by all members of the Committee on Regional Development at the terrible loss of life in Madeira and our intention to do all we can to assist Madeira in its hour of need. Of course, the national and regional authorities are already doing their utmost to relieve the difficulties encountered by the people and especially those who have been left homeless and we urgently await their request for European assistance through the European Solidarity Fund. I am sure it will be treated with the utmost expediency by all concerned.
We ask the European Commission to mobilise all its resources and review with the Portuguese authorities how the ongoing European programmes can be adjusted to assist the region. Let me emphasise that the existing Solidarity Fund continues to have well-known limitations. Back in April 2005, the Commission adopted a proposal for the revision of the regulation, which was then adopted by the Parliament at first reading in May 2006. Despite the undeniable usefulness of a more flexible Solidarity Fund, despite the necessity of extending its ambit of operations to cover unforeseen man-made disasters and criminal acts as well as natural ones, the Council has been unable to reach a common position on the review of the fund since May 2006.
In the light of the terrible events in Madeira, we see more clearly than ever that we need a Solidarity Fund which could effectively meet the challenges and allow the Union to deliver prompt and effective assistance when Member States suffer a disaster. I would therefore call on the Spanish Presidency to relaunch the process of amending the Solidarity Fund, proving in this way that the spirit of real European solidarity remains at the heart of the European project.
(DE) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, disasters are, of course, also a consequence of global warming. We need to endeavour to deal with these developments, which we are faced with on an increasingly frequent basis. The question therefore arises as to whether assistance should not be provided from the Globalisation Adjustment Fund, particularly to workers in Madeira, because many work places will, of course, have been destroyed, and whether we could not support the small and medium-sized enterprises in the reconstruction work. We could provide a significant amount of help to craftsmen and the services sector in particular.
I therefore ask the Commission to examine whether resources from the Globalisation Adjustment Fund could not be made available immediately.
(EL) Mr President, I, too, express my deepest regret at the biblical disaster which has hit Madeira and my undivided support for the Portuguese Government. I hope that the tragic outcome in terms of human lives lost and missing persons will not get any worse.
The planet is sending us an SOS message. Climate change, in conjunction with frantic rates of land use and industrial development, demonstrate how vulnerable the environment is. The catastrophic floods in Germany in the past and in countries in Eastern and Central Europe and the fires in Greece have still left open wounds. Disasters definitely have no national borders.
I therefore call on the European Commission to respond positively to the calls by the European Parliament for more energetic action at Community level in terms of preventing natural and man-made disasters and their impact.
I also call for immediate support for the victims in Madeira. It is very important to have an effective Community policy and special emergency funding and a bundle of measures for immediately restoring damage without bureaucratic processes.
My condolences to the victims' relatives.
(PT) The families affected by the tragedy which Madeira is undergoing deserve our profound sympathy and all our solidarity as we pay our respects to the scores of dead and injured persons and the hundreds of displaced individuals. The message of solidarity and hope for the people of the Autonomous Region of Madeira after this terrible disaster requires quick measures and simplified and extraordinary procedures to help those whose lives and property have been destroyed.
It is necessary to mobilise the Solidarity Fund, but it is also necessary to use all other funds possible via emergency measures that must quickly reach the families affected by this catastrophe so that the Autonomous Region of Madeira can quickly rebuild the entire affected area. At this time, the prime consideration is the need for swift implementation.
(EL) Mr President, the tragic floods which hit the autonomous region of Madeira remind us that natural disasters caused by climate change, a lack of planning and infrastructures and a lack of information and readiness can develop into a human tragedy, as has happened here.
I would also remind the House that, a few days ago, huge floods hit other areas of Europe, such as Bulgaria and the region of Evros in Greece, causing loss of properties.
I would also remind the House that Directive 2007/60/EC requires the Member States to carry out a preliminary flood risk assessment for each basin and corresponding coastal regions in their territory by 2011.
We have a duty to put pressure on national governments to ensure that the directive in question is taken up by the Member States. However, the European Union also has a duty - and I do not believe that anyone will disagree - to develop even more intensive action in the field of natural disaster prevention, in the field of the protection, in the final analysis, of human life.
(ES) Mr President, sometimes it is due to fires, sometimes it is due to droughts and sometimes it is due to devastating floods such as this, but the south of the Union has become the most obvious and also the most unfortunate demonstration of the terrible consequences of climate change. If we had a European observatory, it would clearly show that this is the case, which is why combating climate change is so important.
It is, however, also important that we now urgently provide assistance to Madeira in this tragedy, and the Commission is urged to act without delay, with the greatest of urgency.
These are the occasions when the Union has to show that it is effective, that it is supportive and that it is close to its citizens, especially those who need it most.
I, along with the Spanish Members from the Group of the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats in the European Parliament, will support this resolution to help our dear neighbour Portugal, and Madeira. We urge the Commission to get alongside the Portuguese Government without delay, unreservedly and without skimping on resources, in order to alleviate the disastrous consequences of this tragedy as far as possible.
Mr President, ever since I was a kid, my favourite cake was madeira cake and when I discovered there was a lovely island called Madeira, I have had an affinity with it ever since. So when I heard of the devastation last Saturday, my heart went out to the people there, particularly my friend, Nuno Teixeira, and the other Portuguese colleagues, because in my own area, we ourselves suffered from flooding just prior to Christmas.
I was very pleased to hear both the words and the tone of the Commissioner in extending the hand of friendship to the people of Madeira at this terrible time for them, probably to be known from now on as Black Saturday.
But, in the broader sphere, I think that we need to look at the criteria for triggering the Solidarity Fund. Basing it on 6.6% of GDP and EUR 985 million is too high because many of these tragedies are very local, although they can be very devastating.
We need to look at that. However, in the short term, we will do what we can for Madeira and I welcome the Commissioner's statement to that effect.
(SK) On behalf of the Europe of Freedom and Democracy Group, I would like to express solidarity with the inhabitants of Madeira and to express the firm belief that European aid for those affected will come more quickly in this case than it did for Haiti. I would like to believe that both the European Commission and the Portuguese Government will respond more effectively to the natural disaster in Madeira than in previous instances.
I would also like to support my fellow Members who are demanding improvements in the mechanism for providing EU aid in cases of natural disasters so that the aid can be provided effectively and rapidly.
(PT) I would also like to offer a message of support to the families and friends of the victims of the tragic events of Saturday on the island of Madeira.
As an Azorean, a Portuguese and a European, I must appeal to Parliament and to the Union for a demonstration of active solidarity with the Autonomous Region of Madeira and its people.
It is in the regions that the presence of the EU needs to make itself felt and it is precisely at such times, when solidarity is more necessary than ever, that it is most important that it makes itself felt.
(DE) Mr President, firstly, allow me to express my heartfelt sympathy for the victims and the families affected. In Austria, we have a simple saying: he who provides help quickly provides twice as much help. That should not be an issue. We need to quickly find the funds from which to make the resources available and get help to those affected without delay. Analyses will also be necessary.
As someone who lives in a mountainous region, I understand very well what happened here. Similar mistakes were made here to those made in our country. We carried out alignment work and hydraulic engineering work without taking nature into account, and out of small streams and channels, great rivers came. I watched these events, which were also the order of the day in Austria two or three years ago, with horror, in other words, with heartfelt sympathy and understanding. Immediately after the clean-up, after the damage limitation, we need to work together to rectify these mistakes. We offer our help in doing this. We received international help when we suffered our major avalanche disaster in Galtür. International help was needed to enable us to evacuate a whole village and to rescue the people and fly them out. This is an appropriate time to send out a positive signal and to show international European solidarity, and I for one am prepared to do what I can to help in this regard.
(PT) I also wish to express my solidarity with the pain of the people of Madeira and implore the European institutions, particularly the Commission, to release all the available resources and do everything within their power to provide this assistance. I would also like to emphasise that when misfortunes of this type occur, it is much more difficult to address their consequences if they occur in poor countries and poor regions. In the case of Madeira, however, we must also take account of the fact that the economic base of Madeira has been affected due its dependence on tourism, so it has suffered a double blow. Its natural beauty, access routes and quality of life have been completely destroyed. Therefore, the situation really is different when we have problems of this severity in poor countries and poor regions, especially in mountainous and tourist regions, as in the case of Madeira.
It is therefore absolutely essential that there is no more waiting for all the adjustments to the Solidarity Fund that have been requested and proposed, and which have been brought up again here. They must enter into operation immediately because, given climate change, these events will unfortunately occur again and again, particularly in the poorest regions of Europe, as they are the ones that experience torrential rain and extreme drought during the summer.
Member of the Commission. (DE) Mr President, honourable Members, I would like to thank you for the opportunity to speak to you here in Parliament about the floods in Madeira.
You have made an impressive appeal to the Commission to assist Madeira in its current situation and to show a sign of European solidarity. The Commission is prepared to do that. Precisely how it can do that will need to be worked out in the next few days and weeks in close cooperation with the Portuguese authorities. We must, and will, observe the rules of the Fund. Where they provide some leeway, the Commission will use that for the benefit of Madeira. First of all, the damage needs to be assessed and then an application for assistance has to be drawn up and submitted. That is the order in which things need to be done. The Directorate-General for Regional Policy and my colleague, Commissioner Hahn, will provide advice and support in this regard.
Mrs Estrela called for the further development of the key directive and the rules of the Fund. More than four years ago, the Commission presented a proposal in this regard, which Parliament supported. It is currently still with the Council. However, by way of qualification, I would like to say that the proposals that we made at that time would not provide any better opportunities for assistance in this particular case. It is right that prevention must remain an area of focus for our policy. Cohesion policy is therefore precisely the right instrument to use.
I would like to assure you once again that the Commission will do everything in its power to help the people and the administration in Madeira to cope with this terrible event.
The debate is closed.
The vote will take place during the March I part session.
Written statements (Rule 149)
in writing. - (PT) I wish to express my profound sadness and offer my deepest sympathy to the families of the victims of the natural disaster which has struck Madeira.
I wish to express my solidarity with all the people of Madeira, its institutions and regional government. I am calling for the solidarity of the institutions of the European Union in terms of the swift and flexible application of the Solidarity Fund, especially in assigning the maximum possible amount of funding, bearing in mind Madeira's special status as an island and an outermost region of the EU.
I call on the European Commission to apply the Structural Funds - the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund and the Cohesion Fund - on the basis of swift and simplified procedures.
I also appeal to the goodwill of the European Commission to negotiate the reallocation of the Structural Fund resources with the competent authorities on the basis of the Community framework, taking this disaster into account.
in writing. - (PT) I would like to express my profound sympathy and solidarity with the people of Madeira, their institutions and the regional government in view of the tragedy of force majeure which occurred on 20 February in the Autonomous Region of Madeira and which caused several dozen deaths, disappearances, displaced persons, injuries and huge material damage. This situation requires rapid and effective measures of solidarity from the EU. Hence, it requires the greatest possible promptness of all those involved in the allocation of the Solidarity Fund, so that it can be mobilised without delay. It is also crucial that the various funds of the European Union be mobilised in a flexible manner, through advance payments, simplified procedures and a higher rate of cofinancing in order to meet the needs of the Autonomous Region of Madeira. We advocate that the Solidarity Fund should be revised in the manner that has already been requested by Parliament. This fund must function as an emergency fund in which lead times are much reduced and the sums made available are increased.
I would like to offer my condolences to the families of those who have died as a result of the floods and landslides caused by heavy rain on Madeira. Nature cannot be cheated, and since we cannot prevent natural disasters, we should do everything to prevent their destructive effects and come to the assistance of their victims. In the face of natural disasters and other crisis situations, the European Union should be able to react rapidly and efficiently by using appropriate resources. In relation to this, as I have already stressed in amendments submitted relating to the draft report of Mr Danjean on the implementation of the European Security Strategy and the Common Security and Defence Policy, it is essential to ensure the efficient functioning of instruments for reacting to crisis situations by good organisation of command centres, appropriate to the needs of action taken as part of the first and second pillars. Good planning and efficient management of these centres will allow successful action to be taken on the territories of European Union Member States and of other states which need help.
In particular, better coordination of rescue, police, military and fire-fighting forces is needed in the EU. Use of specially trained units, like the Polish Search and Rescue Group of the National Fire Service, which holds UN certification, should be taken into account.