Activities of Julie GIRLING related to 2012/2031(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
Protection of animals during transport (debate)
Shadow opinions (1)
OPINION on the protection of animals during transport
Amendments (25)
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas all action designed to ensure the protection and welfare of animals should be based on the principle that animals are sentient beings whose specific needs should be taken into account, and also that the protection of animals in the 21st century is an expression of humanity and a challenge facing European civilisation and cultureevaluated, monitored and maintained;
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Considers that reducing the volume of transport by transporting carcasses instead of live animals would have a positive impact on the environment, reducing pollution, improving the carbon footprint of the transport sector, anvia a reduction and/or limitation of journey times and the re-establishment of local abattoirs to reduce the distance for slaughter for many transported animals would have a positive impact on the environment, animal welfare, and disease control which in turn could encouraginge the development of local production and consumption;
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the transport of animals is necessary for both logistical and 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 18 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a.(new) Calls for a reclassification of horses separately from other farm animals to reflect the specific physical, physiological and behavioural characteristics of horses as set out in the EFSA report1. Calls for a specific journey limit for horses (to slaughter) to have immediate effect. __________________ 1 EFSA Report on the Welfare of Animals during Transport (2011) pg. 86
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Recalls that Article 32 of the Regulation states that the Commission report shall take into account ‘scientific evidence on the welfare needs of animals’, and may be accompanied if necessary by appropriate legislative proposals concerning long journeys; calls on the Commission and the Council, therefore, to review Regulation 1/2005 in order to establish a maximum 8- hour limit for the journeys of animals transported for the purpose of being slaughtered; and to improve the following: - vehicle specifications; - driver training to enable drivers to cope with the animals they transport especially in the case of an emergency; - the re-establishment of local abattoirs to encourage slaughter close to production. - the encouragement of mobile abattoirs.
Amendment 35 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Considers that the yearly reports submitted byearly by the Member States are essential forin understanding the impaclevel of application and enforcement of the legislation and in taking appropriate corrective action; calls on the Commission to adopt measures on controls and a more harmonised reporting structure by 1 January 2013measures where necessary;
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the transport of meatcarcasses and other animal products is technically easier and financially more rationalless costly than the transport of live animals;
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas the transport of animals over significant distances in unhygenic and unfavourable conditions may increases the risk of transmission of animal and humanand spread of diseases;
Amendment 42 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Urges the Commission to take measures in order to increase cooperation and communication between competent authorities of different Member States; calls on the Commission to increasereview the number of FVO inspections focused on animal welfare and the transport of animals;
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas maintaining the principles of animal welfare influencanimal welfare standards ensures the quality of animal by-products and indirectly affects human health;
Amendment 44 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a.(new) Urges the Commission to ensure that veterinary controls of animals to be transported take place at the end of their transport.
Amendment 56 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas animal slaughter and meat processing at the closest possible proximity to the breeding and production location isare important for the stimulationustainability of rural areas and their sustainableeconomic development;
Amendment 85 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Expresses concern that the data from the Member States contained in the Report, without any possibility of verification, may not fully reflect the actual state of affairs with regard to the transport of animals because of the differing methods and control mechanisms used in individual Member States;
Amendment 91 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
Amendment 113 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 120 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 152 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Believes that given thadue to lack of enforcement the Regulation has not fulfilled its aim of limiting the transport of animals, thus 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;
Amendment 167 #
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, 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.Where scientific research has provided species specific evidence for a maximum journey time, as in the case for non-registered Equidae (outlined in the EFSA report 2011 and World Horse Welfare Dossier of Evidence 2011), a proposal to introduce an amendment to Council Regulation (EC) N° 1/2005 should be developed. - Insists, therefore, that the Commission propose a maximum journey limit of 8 hours without exception, for all movements of horses for slaughter, (including registered horses being moved for slaughter) and non-registered horses transported in accordance with Council Directive 2009/156/EC. - Insists on a thorough, science-based review of welfare standards for horses, including reconsideration of vehicle design standards, space allowances and water provision;
Amendment 202 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11 a. Notes that in view of the EFSA results the transport time of horses should be greatly reduced, and that with regard to other farm animals, the requirement for such a reduction should be carefully considered;
Amendment 209 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Welcomes the fact that in its report the Commission used the scientific research presented by the EFSA, which highlights the need to significantly reduce the length of transport time for horses, which correlates with the suggestions advanced in Parliament's Written Declaration of 25 February 2010, and insists that consideration is given to a maximum journey time for Equidae intended for slaughter and non-registered Equidae, as indicated in Article 32 of the Regulation and EFSA's research;
Amendment 212 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
Amendment 238 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Welcomes the information on the introduction of a navigation system for monitoring the transport of animals, but is disappointed that this system is being used only to a limited extent in Member States for the purposes of monitoring the transport of animals; Notes that the Commission has attempted on two previous occasions to correct this situation and that it is now committed to bring forward implementing measures in this area in the near future. Given this commitment calls on the Commission to only adopt measures that are straightforward to implement at the Member State level and that impose the no additional administrative and financial burdens on the livestock and haulage industries;
Amendment 264 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Is concerned that certain Member States tolerate blatant infringement of the provisions of the Regulation, such as the acceptance of transport schedules which are impossible to fulfil, overstocked vehicles and inadequate space allowances;
Amendment 269 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Calls on Member States to strengthen controls aimed at halting tolerance ofto halt practices that infringe the Regulation and worsen the conditions for the transport of animals,