14. TRADE IN FARM LIVESTOCK: USE
OF STAGING POSTS
| (23710)
11290/02
COM(02) 414
| Draft Council Regulation amending Council Regulation (EC) No. 1255/97 as regards the use of staging posts.
|
| Legal base: | Article 37EC; consultation; qualified majority voting
|
| |
| Department: | Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
|
| Basis of consideration: | SEM of 12 November 2002
|
| Previous Committee Report: | HC 152-xxxviii (2001-02), paragraph 4 (16 October 2002)
|
| To be discussed in Council: | Before the end of 2002
|
| Committee's assessment: | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision: | Cleared
|
Background
14.1
Council Directive 95/29/EC[49]
requires that, after the completion of specified maximum journey
times, farm livestock must be unloaded, fed, watered and rested
for 24 hours at approved premises (staging posts) before any further
period of travel. The criteria for such premises, together with
measures to prevent the spread of disease and requirements for
recording animal movements, are specified in Council Regulation
(EC) No. 1255/97[50].
The current proposal
14.2
This proposal would make a number of changes to the detailed rules
applying to staging posts. In particular:
— operators would have to inform the competent authority
within 24 hours of the animals' departure, and to keep records
for at least three years;
— staging points would have to be cleaned and disinfected
within 24 hours, and to remain clear for a similar period before
a new consignment of animals can enter;
— staging points could only be used at any one time
by animals from the same holding of origin, and that holding would
have to comply with the health standards laid down for breeding
animals.
14.3
In his Explanatory Memorandum of 20 August 2002, the Parliamentary
Under-Secretary of State (Commons) at the Department for Environment,
Food and Rural Affairs (Mr Elliot Morley) said that there are
only six approved staging points in the UK, which have never been
used because journey times within this country are relatively
short. Consequently, he did not see the first two elements of
the proposal as being contentious. However, the last aspect —
which would make permanent the temporary controls introduced during
last year's foot and mouth epidemic, and which would thus suspend
the use of staging points for slaughter animals — would
limit the time and distance of journeys, and hence affect the
export of sheep for slaughter to Greece, Spain and the southern
parts of Italy, since it would be necessary in future for the
animals to establish residency in another Member State and be
re-certified there. The Minister also said that a Regulatory
Impact Assessment would be prepared in discussion with UK staging
point operators and industry representatives, and was expected
to be available by mid-October.
14.4
In our Report of 16 October 2002, we noted that the analysis in
paragraph 14.3 above was based on the assumption that those responsible
for the transport of animals would abide by the new restrictions,
whereas it seemed to us that there would be an economic incentive
either to allow slaughter animals to continue to use staging posts,
or — more worryingly — to avoid using such posts altogether,
thereby compromising the welfare of the animals concerned. We
therefore hoped that the Government would satisfy itself that
the other Member States would be making adequate arrangements
to enforce the new requirements.
Supplementary Explanatory Memorandum of 12 November 2002
14.5
In his Supplementary Explanatory Memorandum of 12 November 2002,
the Minister points out that the proposal is not specifically
an animal welfare measure, but is part of a wider set of changes
to Community animal health controls aimed at reducing the risk
of disease spreading, particularly in sheep, and in the process
making permanent the temporary measures taken last year to combat
foot-and-mouth disease. He adds that they are the basis on which
intra-Community trade in sheep has been able to re-start, and
are thus generally accepted in that light by UK exporters.
14.6
As to our concerns over enforcement, the Minister says that livestock
exports can take place only if an export health certificate has
been issued, and a welfare route plan accepted in advance. He
adds that the UK carefully scrutinises all applications, and will
only issue certificates to approved slaughterhouses or fattening
holdings acceptable to the authorities in the Member State of
destination. Route plans will not be accepted if they propose
stopping at a staging point, and existing Community rules require
Member States despatching livestock to notify destination Member
States of the details of the consignment, thus enabling the local
veterinary authorities to decide whether to carry out post-import
health and welfare checks. The Minister also makes the point
that the integrity of these measures depends on the necessary
will and resources being applied by all Member States, and he
says that the indications since July 2002 are that the controls
are being actively enforced. However, he says that the UK has
repeatedly called for improvements in enforcement, and will continue
to do so.
14.7
As regards a Regulatory Impact Assessment, the Minister says that
consultations with UK staging point operators did not give rise
to any concerns about increased costs or lost export opportunities,
and the impact of the proposal on them would be neutral. Also,
to the extent that the proposal would make permanent an existing,
albeit temporary, arrangement, it would not give rise to any new
costs.
Conclusion
14.8
We are grateful to the Minister for this further information.
We note in particular his observation that the integrity of the
measures depends upon the will and resources devoted to their
enforcement, which indeed was the concern which lay behind our
earlier question. We were therefore glad to see that the controls
are, for the present at least, being actively enforced in the
other Member States.
14.9
In the light of the information now provided, we are clearing
the document.
49
OJ No. L.148, 30.6.95, p.52. Back
50
OJ No. L.174, 2.7.97, p.1. Back
|
