The European Commission’s proposals to strengthen rules on animal welfare during transport evoked a variety of reactions on Tuesday, 19 March, during a debate held in the course of a joint meeting of the European Parliament’s Committee on Transport and Committee on Agriculture.
This European Parliament will not have time to examine the proposals on the table. It will be up to the new European Parliament resulting from the June elections to reach a decision on the text (see EUROPE 13371/16).
On behalf of the Committee on Transport, Anna Deparnay-Grunenberg (Greens/EFA, German) lamented the delays in the presentation of the proposal by the European Commission. She felt that the proposal was a step in the right direction but that it was somewhat deficient with regard to certain aspects: there were no limits on maritime transport, no temperature thresholds in lorries, and no strengthening of controls.
Marianne Vind (S&D, Danish) also welcomed the proposal but would have preferred to limit transport time to 8 hours (as opposed to 9 hours in the proposal). She took the view that animals must be given enough space during transport (thresholds for vertical heights and temperatures inside the vehicles).
Daniela Rondinelli (S&D, Italian) notably insisted on the need to envisage a reciprocity mechanism with third countries in the area of animal transport. Elsi Katainen (Renew Europe, Finnish) asked the European Commission to respect national specificities.
Speaking on behalf of the European Parliament’s Committee on Agriculture, Daniel Buda (EPP, Romanian) lamented that the European Commission had not listened to farmers to a sufficient degree. He said he feared a law that would be akin to an insurmountable obstacle for farmers, and he asked that the impact on farmers’ businesses and the increase to their costs be measured. Mr Buda warned that the transport of live animals must not be prevented by overly strict rules.
Believing that the agricultural sector would be the first impacted by the measures, Jérémy Decerle (Renew Europe, French) threw out the question: “Who will pay for these changes? And if nothing is planned in this regard, we know who will pay: the farmers”. In his opinion, the priority must be to ensure that current legislation is respected.
In contrast, Anja Hazekamp (The Left, Dutch) would have preferred more ambitious proposals, including a ban on exporting live animals or on transporting livestock by sea. (Original version in French by Lionel Changeur)