Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-03-30-Speech-2-069"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20040330.3.2-069"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
".
Mr President, the purpose of this debate is to formulate an opinion for the guidance of the Council and the Commission in coming to a final conclusion in relation to this issue. Certainly we have had a very wide expression of views and opinions from one side and the other on the issue, and I hope and expect that the Council can draw some guidance from what has been said.
Allow me to express the Commission’s opinion in relation to the main points of concern. On travelling times, the European Parliament wants to introduce a fixed and final time limit of nine hours for slaughter animals, while allowing the others to travel with fewer restrictions. As I said at the outset, we cannot adopt measures which would effectively ban a trade, particularly in circumstances where there is insufficient scientific information to support such a move.
In order to limit the transport of animals for slaughter, the European Parliament advocates the use of mobile slaughterhouses. At present there is not enough expertise or practical experience to support this solution and the animal welfare advantages have not been clearly demonstrated.
Regarding the scope of the regulation, the European Parliament suggests a derogation for journeys of less than 100 km, as well as for certain categories of animals such as animals transported for sporting events and shows. The Commission could support retaining the current derogation for journeys of less than 50 km, but there is no reason to exclude from the scope of the regulation other animals that are at risk of suffering poor standards of welfare.
The Commission supports the proposal to open up the possibility for Member States to adopt stricter national rules, provided that they are compatible with the general rules of the Treaty. I am pleased that this would effectively maintain the UK’s restriction on the export of horses destined for human consumption. I have consistently said that I would look at this matter with a view to supporting a legally sustainable text.
In relation to the authorisation of transporters and the pre-approval of vehicles, the European Parliament proposes having a single system for short and long journeys. One of the major objectives of the proposal is to focus checks on long journeys – these are the most critical for the welfare of animals. I believe that by removing the distinction between long and short journeys, the efforts of inspection and the administrative burdens would be diluted and animals transported over long journeys would not benefit from a higher degree of attention from the competent authorities.
The European Parliament suggests introducing the use of a satellite navigation system. This idea is most innovative and the Commission fully supports it in principle. I should add that the Commission proposal already includes a requirement to check the vehicles’ tachographs as a new enforcement tool.
As regards sanctions, a number of amendments have been proposed. Most of the suggestions are already covered by the Commission proposal through a stricter system of authorisation for transporters. A number of other amendments on sanctions need to be examined with regard to their compatibility with the principle of proportionality.
A full listing of the Commission’s position on each of the amendments is being made available to Parliament and I trust that this will be included in the verbatim report of proceedings for this part-session."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples