Strasbourg, 06/04/2001 (Agence Europe) - Following its rapporteur, the President of the EP's Agriculture Committee, Friedrich Graefe zu Baringdorf (Greens, Germany), the European Parliament has requested that the statement on the ingredients of compound animal feed be an full, "open" statement. The plenary amended the Council's common position on the circulation of compound animal feed to this effect and Mr Graefe said that he hoped the Commission would support the European Parliament in the next round of discussions with the Council. Franz Fischler, however, announced at the time of the vote that the Commission would not be able to accept any amendment from the Parliament.
Transparency of information is the first measure to help to restore consumer confidence, badly shaken by the BSE crisis. For this reason, Mr Graefe zu Baringdorf is not in a position to accept the common position in the form it was adopted by the Council. The rapporteur believes that by taking too great account of industry hesitations, the Council has not gone as far as the European Commission did in its initial proposal. The Council replaced the compulsory declaration on ingredients in percentage weight by an indication of the weight range. This list would only be provided if requested by the customer or if the manufacturer decided to provide it. This is unsatisfactory, argues the Agriculture Committee, which basically wants the Commission's initial proposal to be brought back. They also want a positive list by the end of 2001 of ingredients authorised for use in compound feedstuffs. On this point, Commissioner David Byrne was able to partly satisfy the MEPs, saying that he would ask for a feasibility study on the criteria to be used to draw up such a positive list, but the constraints on resources and other priorities meant that it would not be possible to present the list as quickly as the Parliament requested. He said that he was prepared to accept the compromise prepared by the French Presidency on the statement (supported unanimously by all delegations) since what counted, he said, was the fact that certain ingredients had been used, not necessarily the exact quantity used.
Most MEPs supported the Agricultural Committee's requests although the conservatives expressed doubts on the positive list. A negative list already exists, explained Esko Seppänen (GUE/NGL, Finland) and a positive list would be difficult to draw up.