Activities of Jytte GUTELAND related to 2020/2085(INI)
Shadow opinions (1)
OPINION on the implementation report on on-farm animal welfare
Legal basis opinions (0)
Amendments (22)
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas livestock farming plays a prominent role in EU agriculture, as it is not onlyof economically and environmentally, but also culturally highly, social and cultural significantce for EU regions;
Amendment 72 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. WelcomUrges the Commission’s efforts to consolidate to advance the revision of legislation on animal welfare and animal health and ensure that the requirements are clearlead to high animal welfare and are clear and implementable; stresses that these requirements must be applied correctly and uniformly throughout the EU and that regular and comprehensive checks must be carried out; welcomes the Commission’s planned revision of legislation in this area in 2023 in keeping withemphasises that the Commission should ensure that the relevant EU rules are fully implemented by Member States; calls on the Commission to fast-track a revision of legislation in this as soon as possible, based on the highest animal welfare standards and extending the scope, in line with the latest scientific evidence and the objectives of the Farm to Fork Strategy;
Amendment 99 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Welcomes the Council’s efforts to promoteintroduce an EU animal welfare label based on harmonised criteria; expresses its strong support for the development of an mandatory EU animal welfare label based on harmonised and technically substantiated criteria, and calls on the Commission to proceed with the relevant preparations in view of submitting a proposal;
Amendment 116 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Strongly believes that there should be mandatory EU-level animal welfare label; considers that this would improve transparency and increase consumer awareness, while encouraging improvements in animal welfare; points out that according to the implementation study, stakeholders generally consider that an EU label should set out criteria that are species-specific, cover all the stages of the life of the animal and, with the exception of the EU meat industry sector, strictly focus on animal welfare aspects;
Amendment 136 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Draws attention to the importance of animal welfare during transport and welcomes the establishment of the ANIT committee of inquiry in order to examine alleged violations in the application of European Union law on the protection of animals during transport within and outside the EU;
Amendment 142 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Considers that the systematic non- compliance with the European Court of Justice ruling requiring that EU animal welfare rules must apply throughout the transport of live animals also outside the EU, demonstrates that the current system is not apt for purpose; calls on the Commission and the Member States to establish a ban on the transport of animals to third countries;
Amendment 165 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Welcomes the factConfirms that the common agricultural policy (CAP) seeks to enhance the welfare of on-farm animals by providing financial incentives and by focusing on the enforcement of animal welfare legislation; considers that the improvement of farm animal welfare should be adequately supported by the Strategic Plans and through the use of the new EU Strategic Guidelines on Agriculture, inter alia considerably reducing the need for medication, antibiotics, and preserving biodiversity; calls on the Member States to offer greater and effective support to farmers who voluntarily comply with more stringent animal welfare requirements, including through national support programmes;
Amendment 170 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Notes that fur production, which involves the confinement of thousands of undomesticated animals of a similar genotype in close proximity to one another under chronically stressful conditions can significantly compromise animal welfare and increases their susceptibility to infectious disease, as has occurred with COVID-19 in mink; urges the Commission and Member States to acknowledge the risks posed to public health and biodiversity by the continued existence of fur farming; calls for Member States, where the practice is still legal, to take legislative action to immediately phase-out fur production and for the Commission to ban the transport, import and export of live mink in the EU;
Amendment 193 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 205 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses the importance of regular exchanges with representatives of national authorities, agricultural stakeholder organisations, non-governmental organisations, citizens and experts concerning examples and exchange of good practice and possibleneeded improvements in the area of animal welfare; points out that, despite its low cost, knowledge transfer in this area is highly efficient and should therefore be put into practice more quickly. often.
Amendment 210 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Given the ethical dimension of animal welfare, considers it crucial that citizens are provided with clear, easily understandable and accessible information on the existing standards and compliance with animal welfare rules; calls on the Commission and Member states to promote awareness and engage in dialogue with citizens on issues of animal welfare;
Amendment 218 #
6b. Recalls that according to Article 13 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, in formulating and implementing the Union's agriculture, fisheries, transport, internal market, research and technological development and space policies, the Union and the Member States shall, since animals are sentient beings, pay full regard to the welfare requirements of animals, while respecting the legislative or administrative provisions and customs of the Member States relating in particular to religious rites, cultural traditions and regional heritage.
Amendment 226 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 c (new)
Paragraph 6 c (new)
6c. Underlines that, in addition to ensuring high animal welfare within the Union, the EU’s foreign and trade policy should also promote animal welfare globally as part of its green diplomacy, in relevant international bodies, and in bilateral and multilateral agreements;
Amendment 229 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 d (new)
Paragraph 6 d (new)
6d. Points out that according to the Farm to Fork strategy, moving to a more plant-based diet with less red and processed meat and with more fruits and vegetables will reduce not only risks of life-threatening diseases, but also the environmental impact of the food system; considers that this could also help to improve animal welfare;
Amendment 233 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 e (new)
Paragraph 6 e (new)
6e. Underlines that most stakeholders agree that the animal welfare legislation was outdated and in need of revision;
Amendment 235 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 f (new)
Paragraph 6 f (new)
6f. Points out that, according to studies, the General Directive and the Broilers Directive seems to have achieved only small impacts, and the Pigs Directive has also failed to achieve some of its objectives, as mutilations and cramped and stressful housing conditions without enrichment remain the norm for pigs in many Member States;
Amendment 237 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 g (new)
Paragraph 6 g (new)
6g. Expresses concern about the fact that, with the exception of the Laying Hens and Calves directives, a combination of derogations, exceptions, vague requirements or the absence of specific protections in EU legislation have existed in parallel to various national legislations, all of which have been blamed by many stakeholders from different categories for distorting competition;
Amendment 240 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 h (new)
Paragraph 6 h (new)
6h. Highlights that the General Directive has generally been the least impactful of the directives in scope, with the vague nature of the requirements and the large margins of interpretation it has allowed, links between improvements on the ground and the directive have been impossible to characterise; points out that the absence of species-specific protections for a number of species was seen by most stakeholders as a key problem for dairy cows, broiler and hen breeders, rabbits, sheep and turkeys;
Amendment 244 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 i (new)
Paragraph 6 i (new)
6i. Considers that it is crucial that future policy coherence is ensured, with animal welfare requirements integrated into international trade policy, aquaculture policy, and the common agricultural policy (CAP);
Amendment 245 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 j (new)
Paragraph 6 j (new)
6j. Highlights that legislation does not specify a number of requirements, such as how they should be complied with or monitored, and therefore leaves much discretion to Member States to specify numerous requirements and how they would assess them, which leaves room for different approaches and sometimes for subjectivity; stresses that this leads to inconsistent monitoring and enforcement across the EU; expresses concern on the level of official controls; highlights that according to the implementation study, sometimes and particularly for species which are not subject to specific regulations, there are no or very few official controls; considers that this should addressed in the revision of animal welfare legislation;
Amendment 248 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 k (new)
Paragraph 6 k (new)
6k. Points out the need to ensure that there is sufficient data available on the implementation of the legislation;
Amendment 257 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 t (new)
Paragraph 6 t (new)
6t. Stresses that consumers’ interest in animal welfare practices on the farm, at slaughter and during transport has been growing in the EU over the last two decades; notes that according to a Eurobarometer survey carried out in2016, 52% of Europeans look for animal welfare labels when shopping, although one in ten Europeans does not know that these labels exist; highlights that 47% of Europeans think that choice of animal welfare-friendly food products in retail is limited;