Activities of Jorgo CHATZIMARKAKIS related to 2008/0211(COD)
Plenary speeches (2)
Protection of animals used for scientific purposes (debate)
Protection of animals used for scientific purposes (debate)
Amendments (31)
Amendment 11 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) It is necessary to include specific invertebrate species within the scope of this Directive, as twhere is scientific peer reviewed evidence of the potential ability of such species to experience pain, suffering, distress and lasting harm has been established.
Amendment 64 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Non-human primates and other animal species with an equally high level of neurophysiological sensitivity and cognitive ability to suffer shall not be used in procedures, with the exception of those procedures meeting the following conditions:
Amendment 66 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) (a) the procedure has one of the purposes referred to in points (1), (2)(a), (3) and is undertaken with a view to the avoidance, prevention, diagnosis or treatment of life- threatening or debilitating clinical conditions in human beings or the purpose referred to in pointor (5) of Article 5;
Amendment 71 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) there is a scientific justification by the applicant to the competent national authority or ethical review body that the purpose of the procedure cannot be achieved by the use of other species than non-human primates.
Amendment 74 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 2
2. Notwithstanding paragraph 1, great apes shall not be used in procedures, subject to the use of the safeguard clause in Article 50procedures may be carried out on great apes and other animal species with an equally high level of neurophysiological sensitivity and cognitive ability to suffer only with a view to the avoidance, prevention, diagnosis or treatment of clinical conditions that are life- threatening or debilitating for human beings or these animal species or which threaten the survival of the species.
Amendment 133 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 27 – paragraph 1
Article 27 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that EU breeding and supplying establishments of non-human primates have a strategy in place for increasing the proportion of animals that are the offspring of non- human primates that have been bred in captivity.
Amendment 135 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 27 – paragraph 2
Article 27 – paragraph 2
Amendment 167 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 37 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 37 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. The competent authority carrying out the ethical evaluation shall consider corresponding expertsise in particular in the following areas:
Amendment 169 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 37 – paragraph 4
Article 37 – paragraph 4
4. Ethical evaluation shall be performed in a transparent manner, by integrating the opinion of independent partiesby integrating independent expertise whilst safeguarding intellectual property and confidential information.
Amendment 183 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 41 – paragraph 4
Article 41 – paragraph 4
4. Member States may allow the authorisation of multiple projects under one group authorisation when those projects are required by law.
Amendment 188 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 43 – paragraph 1
Article 43 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that the decision to grant an authorisation is taken and communicated to the user establishment at the latest within 390 days from the submission of the application. Should the Member State fail to take a decision within that period, the authorisation shall be deemed to have been granted, where the project concerned involves only procedures classified as "up to mild" and non-human primates are not used. In all other cases, no such presumption shall apply.
Amendment 190 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – title
Article 6 – title
Amendment 193 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 43 – paragraph 2
Article 43 – paragraph 2
Amendment 195 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 45
Article 45
The Commission and Member States shall contribute to the development andfinancially and by any other appropriate means, to the development and, where appropriate, scientific validation of alternative approaches that couldintended to provide the same or higher level of information as that obtained in procedures using animals but that do not involve the use of animals or use fewer animals or that entail less painful procedures and shall take such other steps as they consider appropriate to encourage research in this field.
Amendment 199 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 45 a (new)
Article 45 a (new)
Amendment 202 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – introductory phrase
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – introductory phrase
1. Non-human primates and other animal species with an equally high level of neurophysiological sensitivity and cognitive ability to suffer shall not be used in procedures, with the exception of those procedures meeting the following conditions:
Amendment 218 #
Proposal for a directive
Annex IV – point 3 – point 3.5 – point a
Annex IV – point 3 – point 3.5 – point a
(a) USufficient uncontaminated drinking water shall always be available to all animals.
Amendment 231 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 3
Article 13 – paragraph 3
3. Death as the end-point in a procedure shall be avoided as far as possible and replaced by early and humane end-points. If death as the end-point is unavoidable, it shall be achieved using the least painful method possible and the procedure shall be designed so as to result in the deaths of as few animals as possible.
Amendment 234 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) where anaesthesia is incompatible with the purpose of the procedure unless, provided the procedure involves serious injurieswill cause no more thatn may cause severe painild pain or distress.
Amendment 239 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 1
Article 15 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that all procedures are classified in accordance with definitions established by the Commission with the involvement of stakeholders, including animal-welfare experts. The classification system should, at the minimum, define all procedures as 'up to mild', 'moderate', 'severe' or 'non- recovery' or may create a greater number of categories on the basis of the duration and intensity of potential pain, suffering, distress and lasting harm, the frequency of intervention, the deprivation of ethological needs and the use of anaesthesia or analgesia or both.
Amendment 244 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Article 15 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
4. The Commission shall establish the criteria for classification of procedures, and review every five years the definition of each classification and the number of classifications following consultation with stakeholders. New updated definitions shall be adopted in accordance with the regulatory procedure with scrutiny referred to in Article 51(3).
Amendment 294 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 34 – paragraph 1
Article 34 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission mayshall appoint inspectors to undertake controlinspections of the infrastructure and operation of national inspections in Member States and to ensure that severity classifications are applied correctly and uniformly in the territory of the European Union.
Amendment 305 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 36 –paragraph 1 – introductory phrase
Article 36 –paragraph 1 – introductory phrase
1. The user establishment or the person scientifically responsible for the project shall submit an application for the project authorisation, which shall include the following:
Amendment 312 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 37 – paragraph 1 – introductory sentence
Article 37 – paragraph 1 – introductory sentence
1. TheBefore authorisation is granted, it shall be verified through ethical evaluation sthall verify that the project, as described and scientifically justified by the applicant, meets the following criteria:
Amendment 314 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 37 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 37 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the project is scientifically justified or required by law, indispensable and ethically defensible;
Amendment 316 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 37 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 37 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the purposes of the project justify the use of animals and cannot be achieved through other methods or procedures;
Amendment 319 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 37 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 37 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) the project is designed so as to enable procedures to be carried out in the most humaneanimal-welfare oriented and environmentally sensitive manner.
Amendment 370 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 46 – paragraph 1
Article 46 – paragraph 1
1. Each Member State shall, by [one year after entry into force of this Directive], designate a national reference laboratory for the validation of alternative methods replacing, reducing and refining the use of animalss to animal tests used for regulatory purposes, and facilities to develop and promote the use of alternatives to animal procedures undertaken for other purposes, such as basic and applied biomedical and veterinary research.
Amendment 372 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 46 – paragraph 4 – point a
Article 46 – paragraph 4 – point a
(a) cooperate with the Commission in their area of competence and perform tasks to advance strategies to replace animal procedures;
Amendment 373 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 46 – paragraph 4 – point b
Article 46 – paragraph 4 – point b
(b) participate in pre-validation and validation of alternative methods, where appropriate, under the co-ordination of the Commission;
Amendment 379 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 53 – paragraph 1a (new)
Article 53 – paragraph 1a (new)
The Commission shall, in consultation with the Member States, conduct an evaluation of scientific progress made as a result of projects and procedures using animals in order to establish the scientific benefits of the projects and procedures in question. The review shall be conducted every five years commencing two years after the entry into force of this Directive. The review shall consider the impact of developments in technological, scientific and animal welfare knowledge and set targets for the implementation of validated replacement methods.