7 Amendments of Marc TARABELLA related to 2012/2031(INI)
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the transport of animals is necessary for economic reasons, whilst at the same time giving rise to an increase in the financial costs of animal production, which are borne on the one hand by farmers and breeders, and on the other hand by consumers;
Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas animal slaughter and meat processing at the closest possible proximity to the breeding location is important for the stimulation of rural areas and their sustainable development; whereas, therefore, it is necessary to adapt the Commission’s ‘hygiene package’, which resulted in the closure and restructuring of a large number of small and medium- sized abattoirs;
Amendment 98 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Believes that in relation to the weak and ineffectual system of monitoring compliance with the conditions of animal transport in some Member States it seems expedient to consider the creation, in Member States, of specialisedstandardising the monitoring institusystems that would monitoro improve compliance with provisions governing the protection and welfare of animals, including conditions for the transport of animals;
Amendment 110 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Stresses the importance of explaining to European consumers that its demands in terms of animal welfare will have an additional cost which will inevitably have to be borne and reflected in the final price; it is, in fact, inconceivable that the demands of European citizens in terms of animal welfare will, in this case, be borne exclusively by the breeders and transport companies;
Amendment 115 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Expresses disappointment that the Commission has not presented a fullRequests from the Commission a more thorough analysis supported by calculations as tof the effect of the costs of live animal transport on the price of meat products within the European Union, being satisfied with the thesis, unsupported by any proof,with economic analyses of the price of meat at European level having shown that transport companies were unable to transfer their costs onto any other entity in the social sector;
Amendment 148 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Believes that given that the Regulation has not fulfilled its aim of limiting the transport of animals, EU policy on the matter should be reviewed and should be directed at supporting local processing, small local slaughterhouses and local meat processing plants, based on the supply of animals for slaughter from the immediate vicinity, whilst European beef export capacities must be maintained and there must therefore be a sufficiently clear system of exemptions to enable our breeders to remain competitive and to access potential new markets;
Amendment 174 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Insists on a reconsideration of the issue of limiting the transport time of animals destined for slaughter to eight hours, with some exceptions based on geographic conditions or on possible access to new markets, and the option of longer transport of some animal species confirmed by scientific research results, provided that the rules on animal welfare are complied with;