2020/2085(INI) | [ParlTrack]

Draft opinion
Citation 1 a (new)

- having regard to the European Commission’s Fitness Check Roadmap to assess the effectiveness, relevance, efficiency and consistency of on-farm animal welfare including EU rules on animal transport and slaughter;

Amendment 10 #

Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)

Aa. whereas the latest scientific knowledge and increased consumer interest show the need for revising and introducing new legislation to improve animal welfare and make the farming of animals more sustainable;

Amendment 100 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. ~~Welcom~~Notes the Council’s ~~efforts~~position seeking to promote the development of an EU animal welfare label based on harmonised and technically substantiated criteria;

Amendment 101 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Welcomes the ~~Council’s~~ efforts to promote the development of an single EU animal welfare label based on harmonised and technically substantiated criteria;

Amendment 102 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Welcomes the Council’s efforts to promote the development of an EU animal welfare label based on harmonised and technically substantiated criteria; deeply regrets that 24 various animal welfare labelling systems across the EU at farm level reinforce a fragmented and inefficient labelling system; considers that a harmonised coherent labelling methodology that fully integrates animal welfare should provide transparent information on the animal’s quality of life from birth, including live transport and slaughter; recommends that this should include photographic images of the animals that are kept under organic farming, conventional farming and factory farming production methods that clearly and concisely indicate the use of GMOs, antibiotics, pesticides and veterinary medicines in animal production in order to promote fair competition and empower consumers to make informed and sustainable food choices;

Amendment 103 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Welcomes the Council’s efforts to promote the development of an EU animal welfare label based on harmonised and technically substantiated criteria, which should be species-specific and cover all the stages of the life of the animal, and underlines the importance of a mandatory method of production and origin labelling of meat and dairy products in order to increase transparency, empower consumers and create a level-playing field;

Amendment 104 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Welcomes the Council’s efforts to promote the development of an EU animal welfare label based on harmonised and technically substantiated criteria; stresses, however, that labels are insufficient for guaranteeing high animal welfare and can only be considered complementary or transitional measures; believes that if a label is to be developed, it must be made mandatory in order to be effective and sufficiently inform consumers;

Amendment 105 #

Chrysoula ZACHAROPOULOU, Pascal CANFIN, Martin HOJSÍK, Pascal DURAND

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Welcomes the Council’s efforts to promote the development of an EU animal welfare label based on harmonised and ~~techn~~scientifically substantiated criteria and proposes that such label is developed jointly and in parallel with the updated minimal criteria when revising the animal welfare legislation;

Amendment 106 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Welcomes the Council’s efforts to promote the development of an EU animal welfare label based on harmonised and technically substantiated criteria; takes the view that this label should provide consumers with information relating to all stages of the life of farm animals from birth including transport and slaughter;

Amendment 107 #

Aurélia BEIGNEUX, Catherine GRISET, Annika BRUNA, Laura HUHTASAARI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Welcomes the Council’s efforts to promote the development of an EU animal welfare label based on harmonised and technically substantiated criteria; and that does not jeopardise the competitiveness of the agricultural sector vis-à-vis third countries;

Amendment 108 #

Tudor CIUHODARU

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Welcomes the Council’s efforts to promote the development of an EU animal welfare label based on harmonised and technically substantiated criteria and the immediate implementation of this animal welfare provision;

Amendment 109 #

Chrysoula ZACHAROPOULOU, Pascal CANFIN, Martin HOJSÍK, Pascal DURAND

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Welcomes the Council's efforts to promote, where possible, the development of a European animal welfare label based on harmonised and technically sound criteria.

Amendment 11 #

Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)

Aa. whereas European citizens are increasingly concerned about animal suffering and improving the welfare of farm animals is an insistent and important demand from consumers; whereas high animal welfare standards contribute to the quality of products and farmers must be able to benefit from all the necessary support from the European Union to meet the expectations of European consumers by making a transition to models that better respect animal sensitivity;

Amendment 110 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Recalls the UNESCO Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission found that 9,500 hazardous algae blooms are becoming more frequent through climate change and increased fish farming and aquaculture, fish feed and waste dispersed into the seas is directly causing the proliferation of harmful microalgae blooms, causing fish to die from a lack of oxygen; calls on the Commission and the Member States to implement measures to improve water quality, disease control and to limit stocking densities in aquaculture production in the interests of human health and animal welfare and to take steps to improve the welfare of marine invertebrates, like crabs and lobsters, by including these animals in their animal welfare legislation and harmonised labelling proposal and by banning the practice of boiling these animals alive;

Amendment 111 #

Chrysoula ZACHAROPOULOU, Pascal CANFIN, Martin HOJSÍK, Pascal DURAND

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Stresses that addressing the suffering of animals cannot be effectively addressed through market measures, and instead requires the introduction and implementation of binding high standards for animal welfare; believes that in fact there is no issue with lack of demand among people for high animal welfare products, and that it is obvious that people do not want to contribute to the suffering of animals; in this light, considers that any harmonised EU animal welfare label will be insufficient for achieving systemic change to properly address the suffering of animals;

Amendment 112 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Deplores the low level of checks on compliance with animal welfare legislation; calls for increased efforts in monitoring implementation and for the use of harmonised and appropriate sanctions in all Member States; calls on the European Commission to launch infringement procedures against Member States that fail to meet their animal welfare obligations without delay;

Amendment 113 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Stresses that, in the context of food safety, environmental protection, climate action, animal welfare and equality between Member States, the Commission must at all times ensure strict enforcement of European legislation and calls on the Commission to make more and better use of infringement procedures in this regard, including strong sanctions;

Amendment 114 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Calls on the Commission to submit regular reports to Parliament on the implementation and enforcement of the Union animal welfare legislation, identifying gaps and including a breakdown of infringements by Member State, by species and by type of infringement, in relation to the volume of live animal transport per Member State;

Amendment 115 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Highlights the voluntary initiatives carried out at national level by sectors such as the pig-farming industry (e.g. Spain’s IAWS animal welfare label) with the aim of implementing new animal welfare certificates that go beyond the existing legislative framework and take into account high standards with regard to biosecurity, traceability and the proper handling of animals;

Amendment 116 #

Draft opinion
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 117 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Highlights the fact that the animal welfare label should be mandatory for all animal source food products sold in the EU, based on a core and standardized set of animal welfare indicators which should cover the entire supply chain: breeding, fattening, transport and slaughter;

Amendment 118 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Stresses out that such an animal welfare label should provide transparent information on the animal’s life from birth, including live transports and method of slaughter, including whether the animal was pre-stunned and by which system;

Amendment 119 #

Christine SCHNEIDER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. The animal welfare label should include information on production methods and a selection of scientifically- based animal protection indicators concerning, inter alia, husbandry systems and transport;

Amendment 12 #

Aurélia BEIGNEUX, Catherine GRISET, Annika BRUNA, Laura HUHTASAARI

Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)

Aa. whereas consumer interest in the origin, preservation and quality of food purchased is higher than ever, and whereas food quality in relation to animal welfare and animal health therefore has an important part to play in achieving the goals of the Green Deal;

Amendment 120 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Recalls that the Commission is preparing a future EU label; reiterates that this label has to cover the farming, transport and slaughter of the animals;

Amendment 121 #

Aurélia BEIGNEUX, Catherine GRISET, Annika BRUNA, Laura HUHTASAARI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Calls on the Commission to bring in a mandatory label that will give consumers precise information on: – the farming method: intensive or extensive, with or without cages; – the transport method: by land or sea, over a short or long distance; –the slaughter method: with or without prior stunning;

Amendment 122 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Draws attention to the fact that animal welfare is something that belongs to the animal, and although the human practices and the environment interfere on it, the use of animal based measures should be encouraged in an European label;

Amendment 123 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Points out that additional efforts on the part of farmers to improve animal welfare must be rewarded accordingly through trade;

Amendment 124 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2b. Welcomes the Commission intention to review the Council Regulation 1099/2009 (Slaughter Regulation); stresses the need to align the legislative text with the latest scientific knowledge and evidence, broaden its scope to fish and set mandatory and harmonised higher animal welfare provision for mobile slaughter;

Amendment 125 #

Chrysoula ZACHAROPOULOU, Pascal CANFIN, Martin HOJSÍK, Pascal DURAND

2b. Stresses that public awareness and understanding of animal welfare in food production is significantly improved through education in schools and advertising campaigns;

Amendment 126 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2b. Encourages the Member States to strengthen awareness of animal welfare in the context of school courses and in particular in agricultural training courses;

Amendment 127 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2b. Calls on the Commission to bring forward proposals without delay to immediately ban the cruel and unnecessary force-feeding of ducks and geese for the production of foie gras;

Amendment 128 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2b. Reiterates its call on the Commission to bring forward proposals to ban the cruel and unnecessary force- feeding of ducks and geese for the production of foie gras;

Amendment 129 #

Aurélia BEIGNEUX, Catherine GRISET, Annika BRUNA, Laura HUHTASAARI, Sylvia LIMMER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)

2c. Highlights that legal standards designed to protect fish are generally far fewer and less stringent than those designed to protect other animals farmed for human consumption; in light of this, points out the need to align EU regulations on fish welfare to the standards set out in the OIE Aquatic Animal Health Code;

Amendment 13 #

Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)

Aa. whereas animal welfare is a topic of growing interest for society as it becomes more sensitive to how animals are treated, and especially how they are farmed;

Amendment 130 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)

2c. Calls for our standards of animal protection and welfare to be complied with also in the case of imports from outside the EU if the competitiveness of European producers is to be guaranteed;

Amendment 131 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Draws attention to the ~~importance~~violations of animal welfare during transport and welcomes the establishment of the ANIT committee of inquiry on the protection of animals during transport; calls in this regard on the Commission to implement and enforce Council Directive 1/2005/EC of 22 December 2004 on the protection of animals during transport and to establish a ban on the transport of animals to countries outside of the EU in case the welfare of these animals is not guaranteed, referring to the current incompliance with the ruling of the Court of Justice of the European Union in Luxembourg that animal welfare protection does not stop at the EU's external borders and that animal transporters departing from the European Union must therefore also comply with European animal welfare rules when leaving the EU;

Amendment 132 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. ~~Draws attention to~~Reiterates the importance of animal welfare during transport and welcomes the establishment of the ANIT committee of inquiry and notes the conclusions of the ECA's Special Report on animal welfare in the EU that recognised that data reported by Member States is not sufficiently complete, consistent, reliable or detailed enough to permit drawing evidence based conclusions on compliance at EU level; calls on the Commission to draw up, a list of operators who have perpetrated repeated and serious breaches, on the basis of inspection and implementation reports; calls on the Commission to publish frequent updates of this list, and also to promote examples of best practice in both transport and governance;

Amendment 133 #

Chrysoula ZACHAROPOULOU, Martin HOJSÍK, Pascal DURAND

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Draws attention to the importance of animal welfare during transport and welcomes the establishment of the ANIT committee of inquiry; considers that findings of the Committee should be duly taken into consideration by the European Commission and the Member States and its recommendations should be reflected in the necessary revision of the animal transport regulation No 1/2005; considers that this revision should, among others, strengthen the role of contingency plans for long journeys and pay more attention to physiological and ethological needs of animals during transport as demanded by the scientific veterinarian community;

Amendment 134 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Draws attention to the importance of animal welfare during transport and welcomes the establishment of the ANIT committee of inquiry; recalls that the transport of live animals leads too often to severe animal welfare problems; calls on the European Commission and the Member States to encourage a transition to the transport of meat, carcasses and genetic material and to explore the possibilities of using and developing mobile slaughterhouses and on-farm slaughter;

Amendment 135 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Draws attention to the importance of animal welfare during live transport and welcomes the establishment of the ANIT committee of inquiry to assess responsibilities of Member States and the Commission in relation to the poor implementation and enforcement of Council Regulation 1/2005, as well as to put forward recommendations for its revision;

Amendment 136 #

Draft opinion
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 137 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Draws attention to the importance of ensuring high animal welfare during transport in the meantime, as part of the transition to ending the transport of animals, and welcomes the establishment of the ANIT committee of inquiry;

Amendment 138 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Emphasises that the transport of live animals does not only pose severe risks to the welfare and health of the animals transported, but also to public health due to the possible spread of diseases, and underlines in this regard the importance of reducing, refining and replacing live transport and to make sure that the revision of the Council Directive1/2005/EC of 22 December 2004 on the protection of animals during transport contains comprehensive species- and category-specific requirements, especially with regards to the maximum duration of a transport, and a more strict and transparent monitoring and reporting system to ensure that systematic violations will be effectively identified and prevented, and that this revision is in full alignment with the objectives of the Farm to Fork Strategy;

Amendment 139 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Recalls the recent events in the Mediterranean Sea (Elbeik and Karim Allah cases) and in the Suez Canal; stresses that animal welfare requirements can hardly be met during long-distance journeys of farm animals, especially during transport by sea; urges the Commission to initiate the debate on the necessary changes of the relevant EU legislation in this sense; calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure in the meantime that the requirements of the animal transport regulation No 1/2005 are respected and violations of its provisions are dealt with by all appropriate means, including the infringement procedure;

Amendment 14 #

Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)

Aa. whereas livestock farming is a key pillar in the sustainability of rural areas in the EU;

Amendment 140 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Calls on the Commission and Member States to increase control checks and fully implement mandatory due diligence across the entire animal production and supply chain and, to conduct efficient and systematic inspections of animal consignments before loading, in order to halt practices that worsen animal welfare conditions for the transport by land or sea, such as allowing overstocked means of transport or unfit animals to continue long journeys, or permitting the continued use of control posts with inadequate facilities for resting, feeding and watering of animals in transport;

Amendment 141 #

Günther SIDL

Draft opinion
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 therefore on the Commission and the Member States to establish a ban on the transport of animals to third countries;

Amendment 142 #

Chrysoula ZACHAROPOULOU, Pascal CANFIN, Martin HOJSÍK, Pascal DURAND

Draft opinion
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 143 #

3a. Welcomes the renewing of the mandate of the Platform on Animal Welfare by the European Commission; takes the view that exchanges of good practices should be further strengthened and that the experts of the Platform should be entitled to make recommendations for new legislation or revising existing ones where needed;

Amendment 144 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Stresses the importance of moving forward with the Commission proposal for an integrated nutrient management action plan to address nutrient pollution at source and increase the sustainability of the livestock sector, as outlined in the Farm to Fork Strategy;

Amendment 145 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Points out that livestock farms in the EU are real innovation hubs that incorporate scientific advances to constantly improve their infrastructure and practices, consolidating high animal welfare standards to respond to meet the increasing demands of consumers;

Amendment 146 #

Tudor CIUHODARU

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Stresses the need for better monitoring of maritime livestock transport, especially following the accidental blockage of the Suez Canal, which resulted in the deaths of thousands of animals on transport vessels;

Amendment 147 #

Aurélia BEIGNEUX, Catherine GRISET, Annika BRUNA, Laura HUHTASAARI, Sylvia LIMMER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Considers extensification to be one of the quickest and most effective ways of improving on-farm animal welfare, as well as many other benefits for the environment, climate and human health;

Amendment 148 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Reiterates the importance of taking account of the upcoming findings of the ANIT Committee of Inquiry; stresses the good work being done in the ANIT Committee of Inquiry;

Amendment 149 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Calls for any legislative proposal to be preceded by an impact assessment covering the three levels of sustainability – environmental, economic and social;

Amendment 15 #

Stanislav POLČÁK, Jiří POSPÍŠIL

Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)

Aa. whereas Article 13 TFEU provides that in formulating and implementing inter alia the Union's policies, the Union and the Member States are to pay full regard to the welfare requirements of animals, since they are sentient beings, while respecting the legislative or administrative provisions and customs of the Member States;

Amendment 150 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Considers that long-distance journeys of live farm animals for the purpose of slaughter cannot be justified by any reason and should be prohibited;

Amendment 151 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Points out that developing regional abattoirs and authorising regional on- farm slaughter will enable long animal transports to be avoided and regional food supply structures to be strengthened;

Amendment 152 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Promoting the development of regional abattoirs and authorising on- farm slaughter will further improve the welfare of farm animals;

Amendment 153 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to increase control checks to monitor for antibiotics and other banned chemical residues found in imports from non-EU countries as part of the Commission’s strategy to effectively address the unregulated use of antibiotics and pesticides used in animal, seafood and aquaculture production; calls for short, local and regional supply chains and urges the Commission and the Member States to fully consider the CJEU ruling C-424/13 and to propose a complete phase out of the export of live animals to third countries by 2025; promoting alternatives to live animal transport, such as meat-and-carcass and genetic material transport for exports and intra-EU trade;

Amendment 154 #

Aurélia BEIGNEUX, Catherine GRISET, Annika BRUNA, Laura HUHTASAARI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3b. Reminds the Commission that the transport of meat and other animal products is technically easier and ethically more rational than the transport of live animals for the sole purpose of being slaughtered; reiterates its call on the Commission to develop a strategy to shift from live transport to a meat and- carcasses-only trade, given the environmental, animal welfare and food safety impact of live animal transport; considers it an imperative to transition to a completely regional model of livestock production;

Amendment 155 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3b. Points out that animal welfare also extends to the need to transport the animals; stresses that in certain cases the conditions in which they are transported do not ensure sufficient dignity;

Amendment 156 #

Aurélia BEIGNEUX, Catherine GRISET, Annika BRUNA, Laura HUHTASAARI, Sylvia LIMMER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)

3c. Points out that an arsenal of laws in this field (live animal transport) already exists but that these are not enforced;

Amendment 157 #

Aurélia BEIGNEUX, Catherine GRISET, Annika BRUNA, Laura HUHTASAARI, Sylvia LIMMER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 d (new)

3d. Points out that transport by sea, particularly when animals are exported outside the European Union, causes livestock terrible distress; points out that the animals are cooped up in crowed pens with not enough room to move around and must cope with the ship’s motion, a lack of ventilation, unsuitable drinking fixtures and also poor hygiene conditions as a result of insufficient litter facilities;

Amendment 158 #

Aurélia BEIGNEUX, Catherine GRISET, Annika BRUNA, Laura HUHTASAARI, Sylvia LIMMER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 e (new)

3e. Points out also that Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2005 of 22 December 2004 on the protection of animals during transport considers the time spent in transport by sea to be a rest period;

Amendment 159 #

Aurélia BEIGNEUX, Catherine GRISET, Annika BRUNA, Laura HUHTASAARI, Sylvia LIMMER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 f (new)

3f. Calls, therefore, on the Commission to recognise that transport by sea does not permit a genuine rest period for animals;

Amendment 16 #

Aurélia BEIGNEUX, Catherine GRISET, Annika BRUNA, Laura HUHTASAARI, Sylvia LIMMER

Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)

Aa. whereas Article 13 of the TFEU considers animals as sentient beings, thus capable of feeling pleasure and pain; therefore EU legislation must ensure that animals are kept in conditions that do not subject them to maltreatment, abuse, pain or suffering;

Amendment 160 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 g (new)

3g. Calls also on the Commission to prohibit or restrict drastically the transport of animals by sea because of the difficulty, if not indeed the impossibility, of allowing animals to rest during the time, which may last for several weeks, that they are being transported by sea;

Amendment 161 #

Aurélia BEIGNEUX, Catherine GRISET, Annika BRUNA, Laura HUHTASAARI, Sylvia LIMMER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 h (new)

3h. Calls, finally, on the Commission to draw up a blacklist of third countries where livestock is clearly ill-treated in order to prohibit the export of live animals to said countries;

Amendment 162 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Welcomes the fact 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; ~~calls on the Member States to~~regrets that only 2% of EU rural development funding has been used to promote animal welfare standards beyond minimum standards; calls on the Commission and the Member States to adopt measures to end overcrowded, barren sheds; and to rigorously enforce on-farm animal welfare legislation with strong sanctions including the withdrawal of CAP or other EU funds for non- compliance; calls on the Member States to be required to specify concrete actions for improving animal welfare in their CAP Strategic Plans, including ending the use of cages in animal farming and requiring greater accessibility to fresh air, natural daylight, environmental enrichment, shelter and shade for all on-farm species and offer greater and effective support, including financial incentives to farmers who voluntarily comply with more stringent animal welfare requirements, including through national support programmes;

Amendment 163 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Welcomes the fact that the common agricultural policy (CAP) ~~seeks to enhance the welfare of on-farm animals by providing financial incentives and by~~offers animal welfare measures through the 2nd Pillar; considers however that the operations programmed in number of RDP leading to an increase of a cage or crate size by a certain %, make little or no difference for the animals and thus represent an ineffective use of public money; highlights that investments related to compliance with new standards should be eligible for an additional period after they have become mandatory and that the Strategic Plans should in the area of animal welfare focus~~ing~~ on the enforcement of standards of the revised animal welfare legislation~~; calls~~ by 2023 and offer an investment support in order to effectively enforce the ban on cages and crates; calls meanwhile on the Member States to offer ~~greater and effective~~ support to farmers who voluntarily coimpl~~y with more string~~ement animal welfare ~~requirement~~measures which fulfil ethological needs of the respective species of animals, including through national support programmes;

Amendment 164 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Welcomes the fact 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; however, as noted in the Commission’s evaluation of the latest Animal Welfare Strategy, Member States have neglected to take full advantage of these funds for animal welfare purposes, and millions of euros in EU rural development funds available for improving animal welfare are currently unused or poorly used, therefore 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 165 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. ~~Welcomes the fact~~Confirms 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 166 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Welcomes the fact 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; 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 and by cutting down on bureaucracy and red tape so as to facilitate the transformation of livestock farms and infrastructure;

Amendment 167 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Welcomes the fact 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; 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; calls, therefore, for the financial incentives to come from funds other than those of the CAP;

Amendment 168 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. WBel~~comes the fact~~ieves that the common agricultural policy (CAP) ~~seeks to~~must enhance the welfare of on-farm animals by providing financial incentives and by ~~focusing on the enforcement of~~enforcing animal welfare legislation; 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 169 #

Aurélia BEIGNEUX, Catherine GRISET, Annika BRUNA, Laura HUHTASAARI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Welcomes the fact 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; calls on the Member States to offer greater and effective support to farmers who voluntarily comply with more stringent and sustainable animal welfare requirements, including through national support programmes;

Amendment 17 #

Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)

Aa. whereas a code adopted by Members of the Parliament of Wallonia that came into force on 1 January 2019 defines an animal as a sentient being, with feelings, emotions and even a certain level of consciousness;

Amendment 170 #

Draft opinion
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 171 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Draws attention to the fact that climate change, economic crises, the multiplication of predations affect more severely the alpine mountain farms; therefore invites the Commission to support farms characterized by traditional methods such as the use of high altitude pastures, transhumance, the use of the vegetation gradient and in any case the wild or semi-wild farming, removing all obstacles that today stand in the way of the best continuation of activities;

Amendment 172 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Regrets that most animal welfare support measures under the current CAP, as well as in the Commission suggestions for eco-schemes in the future CAP, do not target nor benefit more extensive grazing- based farms where animal welfare standards are generally higher; calls on the Commission and Member States to address this issue by increasing the animal welfare recognition and support provided to smaller and more extensive farms with well adapted interventions;

Amendment 173 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Reminds the Commission and the Member States that CAP funds and national envelopes should be appropriately directed to assist farmers in the transition to cage-free, high animal welfare, ecological farming methods with high quality training provided where required to ensure the welfare of the animals and the environmental and financial health that will help to ensure a resilient and sustainable economy;

Amendment 174 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Points out the progress and improvements – the latter on a voluntary basis – which some Member States have made at national level; welcomes particularly initiatives to reduce the use of antibiotics in poultry farming, increase calving intervals and guarantee species- appropriate, regular job opportunities;

Amendment 175 #

Aurélia BEIGNEUX, Catherine GRISET, Annika BRUNA, Laura HUHTASAARI, Sylvia LIMMER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Calls for the further promotion of activities that reduce the use of antimicrobials in the livestock sector, mitigating the risk of antimicrobial resistance and contributing to animal welfare;

Amendment 176 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Encourages a continuation of the policy of financial support for farmers as part of animal welfare improvement programmes;

Amendment 177 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Underlines the key role that the EU should play in supporting the development of agro-ecological and plant- based agricultural practices;

Amendment 178 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)

4b. Calls on the Commission to ensure a focus on creating a resilient, uniformly- implemented animal welfare system through future legislative measures in all the Member States;

Amendment 179 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)

4b. Stresses the importance of counteracting the reduction in the number of small mountain livestock farms, capable of effectively protecting the territory, through scientific and economic support;

Amendment 18 #

Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)

Aa. whereas the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union' (TFEU) recognises that animals are sentient beings;

Amendment 180 #

Aurélia BEIGNEUX, Catherine GRISET, Annika BRUNA, Laura HUHTASAARI, Sylvia LIMMER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)

4b. Stresses that the market for animal products from cage-free, free range and organic systems, as well as the market for plant-based alternatives, is growing in the EU;

Amendment 181 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)

4b. Calls for targeted support to be set up that prioritises maintaining or even raising the current productivity of the farmers concerned;

Amendment 182 #

Aurélia BEIGNEUX, Catherine GRISET, Annika BRUNA, Laura HUHTASAARI, Sylvia LIMMER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 c (new)

4c. Draws attention to the fact that the increase in wolf predation is having a more severe impact on livestock farms in the Alpine mountains; calls on the Commission to consider the possibility of revising the classification of the species "canis lupus" within Community acts and directives with a view to its possible downgrading from a "strictly protected" to a "protected" species;

Amendment 183 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 c (new)

4c. Points out that castration of piglets to prevent the appearance of disagreeable odours when the meat is cooked is painful for the animal and costly for breeders;

Amendment 184 #

Aurélia BEIGNEUX, Catherine GRISET, Annika BRUNA, Laura HUHTASAARI, Sylvia LIMMER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 d (new)

4d. Calls, therefore, on Member States to prohibit castration of piglets;

Amendment 185 #

Aurélia BEIGNEUX, Catherine GRISET, Annika BRUNA, Laura HUHTASAARI, Sylvia LIMMER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 e (new)

4e. Calls also on the Commission to permit Member States to prohibit the import of products from pigs that have been castrated;

Amendment 186 #

Aurélia BEIGNEUX, Catherine GRISET, Annika BRUNA, Laura HUHTASAARI, Sylvia LIMMER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 f (new)

4f. Recalls that intensive fur farming of animals such as mink continues in Europe; recalls that the conditions in which fur animals are farmed and slaughtered are cruel; recalls also in this regard that overcrowding and a lack of hygiene on these farms facilitates the development of zoonoses or diseases, as occurred with COVID-19;

Amendment 187 #

Aurélia BEIGNEUX, Catherine GRISET, Annika BRUNA, Laura HUHTASAARI, Sylvia LIMMER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 g (new)

4g. Encourages Member States, therefore, to prohibit fur farming and the sale and import of products derived from these farms;

Amendment 188 #

Aurélia BEIGNEUX, Catherine GRISET, Annika BRUNA, Laura HUHTASAARI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 h (new)

4h. Points out that intensive farming is harmful to the environment and cares very little about animal welfare; points out that factory farms increase the risk of epidemics linked to the concentration of animals; points out also that products from intensive farming only offer a very low health and nutritional quality for consumers; points out, finally, that intensive farming constitutes harmful competition for the family farm model that shapes our landscapes;

Amendment 189 #

Aurélia BEIGNEUX, Catherine GRISET, Annika BRUNA, Laura HUHTASAARI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 i (new)

4i. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to turn their backs on this out-of-date model and promote instead small farms that care about animal welfare, the environment and consumers;

Amendment 19 #

Aurélia BEIGNEUX, Catherine GRISET, Annika BRUNA, Laura HUHTASAARI, Sylvia LIMMER

Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)

Aa. whereas farm animals were recognised by the Union as sentient beings;

Amendment 190 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 j (new)

4j. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to progressively ban caged and battery farming, in which 370 million animals are ill-treated every year in Europe; calls also in this regard on the Commission and the Member States to provide farmers using these farming methods with funding for alternative facilities;

Amendment 191 #

Aurélia BEIGNEUX, Catherine GRISET, Annika BRUNA, Laura HUHTASAARI, Sylvia LIMMER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 k (new)

4k. Points out the many advantages of mobile slaughterhouses, as they: – eliminate the need for animal transport, one factor for ill-treatment owing to the length of the journeys, cramped and crowded conditions, and temperatures that are sometimes too high or, alternatively, too low; – replace traditional slaughterhouses which are closing and hence lie further and further away from farms, increasing still more animal transport times; – eliminate the ill-treatment sometimes noted in traditional slaughterhouses, such as ritual slaughter without prior stunning; – eliminate the risk of spreading diseases, including COVID-19, unlike in industrial slaughterhouses; – eliminate stress for animals as the farmer is there with them;

Amendment 192 #

Aurélia BEIGNEUX, Catherine GRISET, Annika BRUNA, Laura HUHTASAARI, Sylvia LIMMER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 l (new)

4l. Calls, therefore, on the Commission to: – finance mobile slaughterhouses; – ensure the general public is better informed, for example by supporting labels established by local stakeholders;

Amendment 193 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

Amendment 194 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Points out that individual management practices often have a greater influence on animal welfare than rules alone; calls on the Commission to adopt a more output-oriented approach to future projects; recognises that the DG SANTE audits serve as an important source of information for the Commission to assess the implementation of the current framework; calls on the Commission to increase the number of independent, unannounced spot inspections by the Food and Veterinary Office (FVO) focused on animal welfare and the transport of animals; believes that differing methods of data collection and control mechanisms make it difficult to establish an accurate picture of compliance in individual Member States;

Amendment 195 #

Aurélia BEIGNEUX, Catherine GRISET, Annika BRUNA, Laura HUHTASAARI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Points out that individual management practices often have a greater influence on animal welfare than rules alone; ~~calls on the Commission to adopt a more output-oriented approach to future projects;~~ recognizes, however, that a scientifically underpinned legal framework setting out minimum requirements is key; calls in this regard on the Commission to amend the animal welfare legislation and to introduce a result-based approach to future projects and peer-to-peer sharing of best practices among farmers;

Amendment 196 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Points out that individual management practices often have a greater influence on animal welfare than rules alone; calls on the Commission to adopt a ~~more output-oriented approach to future project~~n approach to future projects that is more oriented to output and to feedback from consultations with professionals;

Amendment 197 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

Amendment 198 #

Chrysoula ZACHAROPOULOU, Pascal CANFIN, Martin HOJSÍK, Pascal DURAND

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Points out that targeted individual management practices often have a greater influence on animal welfare than rules alone; calls on the Commission to adopt a more output-oriented approach to future projects;

Amendment 199 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Points out that individual management practices often have a ~~greater~~substantial influence on animal welfare ~~than rules alone~~; calls on the Commission to adopt a more output-oriented approach to future projects;

Amendment 2 #

Draft opinion
Citation 1 a (new)

- having regard to the EU Action Plan against Antimicrobial Resistance;

Amendment 20 #

Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)

Aa. whereas the requirements under the animal welfare measure of the Rural Development Programmes are met by an increase of a crate size1a ; whereas the measure does not result in fulfilment of ethological needs of animals; _________________ 1ae.g. operation under M14 in the Slovak Rural Development programme increases the crate size by 15% from the 5.13 m2 to 5.9 m2 for a dairy cow.

Amendment 200 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Underlines the significance of the appropriate use of digitalisation; notes, however, that digitalisation tools cannot solve fundamental problems but should be a supplementary measure, given that they cannot replace qualified professionals;

Amendment 201 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Stresses the importance of regular exchanges with representatives of national authorities, civil society, agricultural stakeholder organisations and experts concerning examples of good practice and possible 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.; considers that the Commission and the Member States should reinforce controls performed at borders on animal food imports from third countries to make sure these imports comply with EU legislation on animal welfare, food safety and the environment; stresses that imports from countries with lower environmental, social, food safety and animal welfare standards have increased;

Amendment 202 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Stresses the importance of regular exchanges with representatives of national authorities, agricultural stakeholder organisations and experts concerning examples of good practice and possible scientifically-sound 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; Considers that funds from the CAP and national envelopes should also be appropriately directed to assist farmers in the transition to cage-free, high welfare, ecological sound farming methods with high quality training provided where required to ensure the welfare of the animals and the environmental and financial health of the farm.

Amendment 203 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Stresses the importance of regular exchanges with representatives of national authorities, agricultural stakeholder organisations and experts concerning examples of good practice and possible 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; encourages the creation of a platform that would facilitate this knowledge transfer and that would help the parties involved to speed up and simplify their regular exchange process as well as store and secure their flows of information.

Amendment 204 #

Tudor CIUHODARU

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Stresses the importance of regular exchanges with representatives of national authorities, agricultural stakeholder organisations and experts concerning examples of good practice and possible 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; stresses the importance of holding such regular exchanges also with the representatives of third countries importing animals from Europe.

Amendment 205 #

Draft opinion
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 ~~possible~~needed 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 206 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Stresses the importance of regular exchanges with representatives of national authorities, agricultural stakeholder organisations, NGOs and experts concerning examples of good practice and possible 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.

Amendment 207 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Stresses the importance of regular exchanges with representatives of national and regional authorities, agricultural stakeholder organisations and experts concerning examples of good practice and possible 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.

Amendment 208 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Recommends that EU trade agreements should only grant trade preferences for animal-based products on the condition that they respect all EU relevant animal welfare standards, including standards currently not applied to imported products (“conditional liberalisation”); recommends that trade agreements allocate sufficient resources to the implementation of provisions on animal welfare cooperation and include an article on “Sustainable Agriculture, Seafood and Aquaculture” in the“Trade and Sustainable Development” Chapters; calls further on the Commission to ensure that all trade agreements are fully compatible with the European Green Deal, the Paris Agreement, the EU's biodiversity commitments and the SDGs, and that, in case of non-compliance, there should be binding and enforceable sanctions;

Amendment 209 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Stresses the need for urgent and bold policy and legislative change in the face of overwhelming scientific evidence of the unsustainability of the current food system and the higher costs of a failure to act, paying full regard to the welfare of farm animals, given that this is integral to food sustainability; recommends that it include measures to stimulate the adoption of higher animal welfare standards, a reduction of the amount of farm animals and stocking densities, and an increase of the production and consumption of plant-based products at the same time;

Amendment 21 #

Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)

Aa. whereas animal welfare can be improved by increasing farm resilience, including increasing the genetic variability of animals on farms; whereas there is a worryingly low level of genetic diversity of farm animals in the EU;

Amendment 210 #

Draft opinion
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 211 #

Pernille WEISS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Emphasises the importance of reconciling animal welfare, the environment, the climate and biodiversity; recalls that the grazing of natural areas in this connection is central to the preservation of natural assets; emphasises the importance of ensuring that animal welfare rules can go hand in hand with rules and frameworks for nature preservation.

Amendment 212 #

Jan HUITEMA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Notes that measures that improve animal welfare are not per se beneficial for climate and environment; stresses that animal welfare should be seen as an integral part of sustainability; calls on the Commission to ensure that animal welfare legislation is coherent with environmental legislation.

Amendment 213 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Underlines the need to incentivize farmers and other relevant stakeholders to slaughter animals at the nearest facility to prevent lengthy animal transport times, reduce emissions and to prioritize the export of meat for long transport;

Amendment 214 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Calls on the Commission and Member States to assess subsidies that are harmful to animal welfare by 2022 and phase them out without delay;

Amendment 215 #

Aurélia BEIGNEUX, Catherine GRISET, Annika BRUNA, Laura HUHTASAARI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Stresses the need to allow imports from third countries which comply with the same animal welfare standards as those in the EU;

Amendment 216 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Calls for the deployment of any EU action to be conditional upon prior consultation with the professionals concerned;

Amendment 217 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)

6b. Calls on the Commission, in its bilateral trade negotiations with third countries, to ensure compliance with the EU’s animal welfare rules and defend sustainable development, within the framework of the World Trade Organisation's General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT ) 1994 and in particular, Article XX which lays down exceptions for measures connected to the conservation of exhaustible natural resources, and Article XXa that includes animal welfare under ‘reasons of public morality’; calls on the Commission, to promote similar measures in existing EU trade and investment agreements to ensure that imported animal, fish and aquaculture products have been produced in line with the EU environmental, social, food safety and animal welfare standards in order to ensure a fair and level playing field for EU producers;

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 219 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)

6b. Stresses the need to swiftly move away from industrial animal farming by a significant reduction of the amount of animals kept in the EU, aiming at a 70% reduction in livestock numbers in the EU, with particular focus on Member States with high livestock density such as the Netherlands, Belgium and Denmark;

Amendment 22 #

Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)

Aa. whereas livestock farming has a significant environmental impact in terms of both biodiversity and ecological balance;

Amendment 220 #

Aurélia BEIGNEUX, Catherine GRISET, Annika BRUNA, Laura HUHTASAARI, Sylvia LIMMER

6b. Outlines the importance of smart livestock farming and the potential of digitalization for on-farm animal health and welfare monitoring; in this context, advanced digitalization technologies should help reducing physical contact with animals in order to enhance animal welfare and avoid disease outbreaks.

Amendment 221 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)

6b. Recalls that the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in a judgment of 17 December 2020 (Case C- 336/19) recognised the right of a Member State to require, in the context of ritual slaughter, ‘a reversible stunning procedure which cannot result in the animal’s death’;

Amendment 222 #

Jan HUITEMA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)

6b. Points out that farmers need adequate timeframes to improve their housing systems due to the large investments that are often required;

Amendment 223 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)

6b. Urges the revision of Council Directive 98/58/EC concerning the protection of animals kept for farming purposes, which sets down generic rules that have proved difficult to implement and enforce; suggests therefore transposing this Directive into a Regulation, thereby creating the possibility of delivering delegated and implementing acts to set down welfare requirements for species for which no species-specific EU minimum standards presently exist, including dairy cattle, beef cattle, sheep, goats, turkeys, ducks, geese, rabbits, farmed fish and of all their offspring;

Amendment 224 #

Aurélia BEIGNEUX, Catherine GRISET, Annika BRUNA, Laura HUHTASAARI, Sylvia LIMMER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 c (new)

6c. Urges the revision of Council Directive 98/58/EC concerning the protection of animals kept for farming purposes, which sets down generic rules that have proved difficult to implement and enforce; suggests therefore transposing this Directive into a Regulation, thereby creating the possibility of delivering delegated and implementing acts to set down welfare requirements for species for which no species-specific EU minimum standards presently exist, including dairy cattle, beef cattle, sheep, goats, turkeys, ducks, geese, rabbits, farmed fish and of all their offspring;

Amendment 225 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 c (new)

6c. Calls, therefore, on Member States to bring in legislation prohibiting slaughter without prior stunning, as in addition to causing a slow and dreadful death, this causes contamination by the intestinal bacteria Escherichia Coli to increase;

Amendment 226 #

Draft opinion
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 227 #

Jan HUITEMA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 c (new)

6c. Stresses the importance of a level- playing field for farmers; calls on the Commission to harmonize animal welfare legislation between Member States where possible.

Amendment 228 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 d (new)

6d. Notes that broiler chickens are the most numerous terrestrial farmed animals in the EU, of which the vast majority coming from intensive farming systems, while their welfare is currently insufficiently guaranteed by the various pieces of EU legislation as they do not address the main problems that are intrinsic to this industry, such as the welfare problems of ever fast-growing broiler chickens;

Amendment 229 #

Aurélia BEIGNEUX, Catherine GRISET, Annika BRUNA, Laura HUHTASAARI, Sylvia LIMMER

Draft opinion
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 23 #

Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)

Aa. whereas the health and economic crisis has cost farmers dear;

Amendment 230 #

Aurélia BEIGNEUX, Catherine GRISET, Annika BRUNA, Laura HUHTASAARI, Sylvia LIMMER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 d (new)

6d. Calls also on the Commission to permit Member States to prohibit the import of products from animals slaughtered in another Member State or in a third country without prior stunning;

Amendment 231 #

Aurélia BEIGNEUX, Catherine GRISET, Annika BRUNA, Laura HUHTASAARI, Sylvia LIMMER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 e (new)

6e. Urges the revision of Council Directive 2007/43 laying down minimum rules for the protection of chickens kept for meat production in order to reduce the maximum stocking density and reduce the sector’s dependency on antibiotics, drastically improve the poor welfare of chickens by providing them with natural light, fresh air, more space and enrichments and establishing a ban on the rearing of extremely fast-growing chickens; reiterates its call to accelerate a shift to alternative rearing systems that use higher welfare or traditional broiler breeds, which are more robust and healthy than fast-growing breeds, and to not allow any import products that do not meet EU standards;

Amendment 232 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 e (new)

6e. Points out that the Commission and Parliament consult the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) on a regular basis in order for the Authority to present scientific reports linked to animal welfare;

Amendment 233 #

Aurélia BEIGNEUX, Catherine GRISET, Annika BRUNA, Laura HUHTASAARI, Sylvia LIMMER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 e (new)

6e. Underlines that most stakeholders agree that the animal welfare legislation was outdated and in need of revision;

Amendment 234 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 f (new)

6f. Notes, however, that many of the recommendations made by this Authority have not produced any action; notes thus that in the past 15 years various reports have concluded that the conditions in which rabbits, dairy cows, fish, cattle and sheep are farmed need to be regulated, without these recommendations giving rise to decision-making by the EU institutions.

Amendment 235 #

Draft opinion
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 236 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 f (new)

6f. Stresses that rabbits are the second most farmed species in the EU in terms of numbers of animals, with a majority of them reared in cages with inadequate welfare standards; calls in this regard on the Commission to propose specific EU legislation on minimum standards for the protection of farmed rabbits;

Amendment 237 #

Draft opinion
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 238 #

Aurélia BEIGNEUX, Catherine GRISET, Annika BRUNA, Laura HUHTASAARI, Sylvia LIMMER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 g (new)

6g. Urges the revision of Council Directive 1999/74/EC laying down minimum standards for the protection of laying hens in order to rapidly phase-out and prohibit enriched battery cages and cage-free systems for all laying hens, to create a level-playing field and at the same time improve the welfare of animals kept in the EU;

Amendment 239 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 g (new)

6g. Calls on the Commission to take account of past and future reports on the welfare of farmed animals by the European Food Safety Authority;

Amendment 24 #

Draft opinion
Recital A b (new)

Ab. whereas unhealthy diets, high in salt, sugar, fat and animal protein are a leading risk factor for disease and mortality in Europe; and at the same time antimicrobial resistance, hazardous pesticides and exposure to endocrine disrupting chemicals via food and food packaging, are also increased threats to public health;

Amendment 240 #

Draft opinion
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 241 #

Aurélia BEIGNEUX, Catherine GRISET, Annika BRUNA, Laura HUHTASAARI, Sylvia LIMMER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 h (new)

6h. Disapproves the unethical and systematic killing of billions of male chicks in the EU every year, whether by using a shredding machine or carbon dioxide gas, as it is a violation of animal welfare law; emphasizes that France and Germany already announced a ban on the systematic killing of male chicks and urges the Commission and the Member States to follow this example;

Amendment 242 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 h (new)

6h. Welcomes initiatives opposing maceration of chicks; emphasises that approximately 300 million male chicks are killed every year in the European Union, at least 45 million of them in France;

Amendment 243 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 i (new)

6i. Calls for Council Directive 2008/120/EC laying down minimum standards for the protection of pigs to be revised to inter alia remove the 28-day exemption for confining sows in individual stalls and to ensure that the animals are kept in group housing throughout the entire gestation period and farrowing;

Amendment 244 #

Draft opinion
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)

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 246 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 j (new)

6j. Underlines that in the context of food safety, environment, climate action, animal welfare and equality between Member States, the Commission should ensure full enforcement of Directives, and urges the Commission that, in the event of violations by the Member States, it imposes strong sanctions, starting with the routine docking of piglet tails, which has been prohibited in the EU since 1991;

Amendment 247 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 k (new)

6k. Stresses that, although a large proportion of sheep and goats are reared in extensive farming conditions, such as on pastureland, significant concerns exist regarding animal welfare in intensive goat and sheep farming; underlines the alarming situation of male goat-kids that are treated as a waste product, as well as face problems such as mutilations, lameness, transport problems and illnesses caused by communicable diseases, and calls on the Commission to address these concerns in the upcoming revision of animal welfare legislation;

Amendment 248 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 k (new)

6k. Points out the need to ensure that there is sufficient data available on the implementation of the legislation;

Amendment 249 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 l (new)

6l. Is deeply concerned by the stable fires occurring in the EU that lead to the horrid death of animals and the release of toxic fumes; calls on the Commission and the Member States to tackle the problem of stable fires by promoting best practices and by introducing fire safety requirements, including preventive measures and mandatory sprinkler installations, measures which guarantee that animals can escape from their stables in the event of fire and a ban on air washing installations, as livestock barns do not only tend to be very prone to fire due to dust, straw and manure gases, but air washing installations, and their ventilation systems, are also flammable and rapidly spread the fire due to fanning;

Amendment 25 #

Draft opinion
Recital A b (new)

Ab. whereas improving animal welfare reduces dependency on antimicrobials;

Amendment 250 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 m (new)

6m. Is of the opinion that animals should no longer be slaughtered in the EU according to methods that cause additional distress, such as the electrical water bath method stunning of poultry and CO2 stunning of pigs, and urges the Member States to ensure that all animals slaughtered in the EU are stunned prior to slaughter, without any exceptions, as confirmed by the European Court of Justice ruling in case C-336/19 of 17 December 2020 that Member States have the right to introduce mandatory pre- slaughter stunning;

Amendment 251 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 n (new)

6n. Reiterates its call on the Commission to revise Council Directive 98/58/EC concerning the protection of animals kept for farming purposes with the objective of ending the use of cages in EU animal farming by 2027; suggests therefore that the Commission continues cooperating with the Member States in order to support the implementation and proper enforcement of legal provisions for the phase-out of all cages in EU animal farming;

Amendment 252 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 o (new)

6o. Reminds that intensive livestock farming is a major contributor to air pollution from ammonia, NOx, particulates and methane emissions and calls for urgent action to reduce these emissions and protect public health;

Amendment 253 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 p (new)

6p. Emphasises the need to ensure that animal welfare does not suffer under new measures for the agricultural sector; stresses that no measures, targets, or incentives should lead to a restriction of livestock animals to indoor confinements; emphasises that animals must be able to graze and roam outdoors and should not be prevented from exhibiting their natural behaviour;

Amendment 254 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 q (new)

6q. Notes that large livestock farms with more than 50 livestock units account for about 70% of agricultural methane emissions, and 40% of total anthropogenic methane emissions in the EU; underlines that this makes mega livestock farms one of the biggest sources of methane emissions in the EU; emphasises that in addition to their methane emissions, mega livestock farms are extremely harmful for animal welfare, public health and the environment; stresses that this demonstrates an urgent need to swiftly phase out intensive animal agriculture in the EU, including a ban on the development of new mega livestock farms; calls on the Commission to put forward concrete and binding measures targeting the industrial livestock sector;

Amendment 255 #

Aurélia BEIGNEUX, Catherine GRISET, Annika BRUNA, Laura HUHTASAARI, Sylvia LIMMER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 r (new)

6r. Considers that sectors that have a major impact on environmental, climate and animal welfare issues should not be promoted by the EU and therefore calls on the Commission to cease funding promotion campaigns to support animal products;

Amendment 256 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 s (new)

6s. Recalls that 80 % of horsemeat sold in France, a figure of 9 000 tonnes in 2019, is imported and that with no proper labelling to inform consumers, they mainly eat horsemeat imported from South America; points out that some farms have been designated ‘fields of horror’ because of the ill-treatment that pervades there; stresses that without checks, these abuses ultimately arrive on European soil through EU distribution chains;

Amendment 257 #

Draft opinion
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;

Amendment 258 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 u (new)

6u. Stresses that the Covid-19 pandemic has shown that industrial farming practices, by keeping animals in close proximity to each other, pose a huge risk for the emergence of new pandemics;

Amendment 26 #

Draft opinion
Recital A b (new)

Ab. whereas EU animal welfare legislation is currently not applicable to marine invertebrates, like crabs and lobsters; whereas several third countries have already included decapod crustaceans in their animal welfare legislation; whereas Switzerland has already implemented a ban on the practice of boiling lobsters alive;

Amendment 27 #

Aurélia BEIGNEUX, Catherine GRISET, Annika BRUNA, Laura HUHTASAARI, Sylvia LIMMER

Draft opinion
Recital A b (new)

Ab. whereas potential changes to European animal welfare legislation should be based on Article 13 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity and respect for Member States’ competences in this area;

Amendment 28 #

Draft opinion
Recital A b (new)

Ab. whereas in Europe, the European Union began drawing up legislation on animal welfare following the adoption in 1976 of a general convention of the Council of Europe concerning all species of domestic animals;

Amendment 29 #

Draft opinion
Recital A b (new)

Ab. whereas, according to the Farm to Fork Strategy, 10.3% of EU greenhouse gas emissions are attributable to agriculture, with almost 70% of agricultural emissions coming from the livestock sector;

Amendment 3 #

Draft opinion
Recital A

A. whereas ~~livestock farming plays a prominent role in EU agricu~~the EU industrial animal agricultural model must move away from current practices and adopt regenerative models such as agro-ecology and organic systems that promote a high standard of animal welfare free from malture~~, as it is not only economically and environmentally, but also culturally highly significant for EU regions;~~ atment, abuse, pain or suffering and promoting the five domains: good nutrition, environment, health, allowing the animals to demonstrate their natural behaviour;

Amendment 30 #

Ab. whereas animal welfare is directly related to animal health; whereas stressed animals are more prone to infections and since some diseases that can infect animals can pass to humans (zoonotic diseases);

Amendment 31 #

Draft opinion
Recital A b (new)

Ab. whereas the spending under the EU and national budget on animal welfare should be cost-efficient and make a tangible improvement in the lives of animals concerned;

Amendment 32 #

Draft opinion
Recital A c (new)

Ac. whereas The Lancet Infectious Diseases Commission has stressed that instead of relying on the routine use of antimicrobials, further effort is required to develop health-orientated systems for the rearing of animals; considers that good health should always be prioritised and integral to the system rather than being propped up by routine use of antimicrobials; whereas it is important to recognise the positive association between good animal welfare and reduced antibiotic use in animals that are well cared for and appropriately housed, are less prone to diseases and infections requiring less antibiotics and other veterinary medicines;

Amendment 33 #

Draft opinion
Recital A c (new)

Ac. whereas a diet rich in plant-based foods and with fewer animal source foods confers both improved health and environmental benefits, and transformation to healthy diets by 2050 will require substantial dietary shifts, whereas global consumption of fruits, vegetables, nuts and legumes will have to double, and consumption of foods such as red meat and sugar will have to be reduced by more than 50% in order to achieve dietary shifts towards less resource-intensive products (more plant based, less refined);

Amendment 34 #

Ac. whereas, the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE), promotes animal welfare through the ‘One Welfare’ approach recognising the close interlinkage between animal health and welfare and human health and welfare - if an animal is healthy, has enough space, is well nourished, feels safe, is free to express normal patterns of behaviour and does not suffer from feelings such as fear, pain and distress;

Amendment 35 #

Draft opinion
Recital A c (new)

Ac. whereas the ‘One Health’ approach, recognises that human and animal health and environmental protection are interlinked and that diseases are transmissible from humans to animals and vice versa and should therefore be addressed together;

Amendment 36 #

Draft opinion
Recital A c (new)

Ac. calls on the EU to adopt measures promoting reduction in the production and consumption of terrestrial and aquatic animal products in order to improve animal welfare and in order to help the EU meet its climate targets under the European Green Deal;

Amendment 37 #

Draft opinion
Recital A c (new)

Ac. whereas hunting is a legal activity that is regulated perfectly by the Member States, with high standards with regard to ethics and protecting animal welfare;

Amendment 38 #

Draft opinion
Recital A d (new)

Ad. whereas industrial livestock farming results in high greenhouse gas emissions, soil degradation, air pollution, water contamination and biodiversity loss, and agriculture is responsible for about 90% of EU ammonia emissions, which has significant negative effects on the environment and biodiversity, and is a major contributor to the air pollution that kills 400,000 European citizens each year;

Amendment 39 #

Draft opinion
Recital A d (new)

Ad. whereas the European Citizens' Initiative (ECI) "End the Cage Age", launched on 11 September 2018 and closed a year later, gained over 1.6 million signatures calling for a ban on cruel caged farming in the EU;

Amendment 4 #

Draft opinion
Recital A

A. whereas livestock farming plays a prominent role in EU agriculture~~, as it is not only economically and environmentally, but also culturally highly significant for~~ in certain EU regions;

Amendment 40 #

Aurélia BEIGNEUX, Catherine GRISET, Annika BRUNA, Laura HUHTASAARI, Sylvia LIMMER

Draft opinion
Recital A d (new)

Ad. whereas the aim set out in the Farm to Fork Strategy is a 50% reduction in sales of antimicrobials for livestock and fish farms by 2030;

Amendment 41 #

Draft opinion
Recital A e (new)

Ae. whereas there are conditions that humankind should provide animals with to ensure their welfare: • freedom from hunger, malnutrition and thirst: they must have access to water and an appropriate amount of food that meets the needs of their species; • freedom from fear and distress: the conditions in which they are reared must not cause them psychological suffering; • freedom from heat stress or physical discomfort: the animal must have a certain degree of physical comfort; • freedom from pain, injury and disease: the animal must not be hurt or injured through ill-treatment and it must receive treatment if it falls ill; • freedom to express normal patterns of behaviour: its environment must be a suitable one for its species;

Amendment 42 #

Draft opinion
Recital A e (new)

Ae. whereas the Union animal welfare legislation (Council Directive 98/58/EC Council Directive1999/74/EC; Council Directive 2007/43/EC; Council Directive 2008/120/EC of 18 December 2008; Council Directive2008/119/EC; Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2005; Council Regulation (EC) No 1099/2009) is widely acknowledged as being too vague, fragmented, open to interpretation and lacking effective enforcement across the Member States;

Amendment 43 #

Draft opinion
Recital A e (new)

Ae. whereas every year, over 300 million farmed animals in the EU are caged for part or all of their lives, which is unnecessary and easily preventable suffering;

Amendment 45 #

Aurélia BEIGNEUX, Catherine GRISET, Annika BRUNA, Laura HUHTASAARI, Sylvia LIMMER

Draft opinion
Recital A f (new)

Af. whereas the European Court of Auditors identified significant gaps and a general lack of enforcement of EU animal welfare legislation and practices prohibited under EU law, such as the routine tail docking of pigs continue to be practiced; underlines that in the context of food safety, environment, climate action, animal welfare and equality between Member States, the Commission should ensure full implementation and enforcement of Directives, and that in the event of violations, Member States should impose strong sanctions, starting with the routine docking of piglet tails, which has been outlawed in the EU since 1991;

Amendment 46 #

Draft opinion
Recital A f (new)

Af. whereas animal welfare is defined as [the animal’s] ‘positive physical and mental state as related to the fulfilment of its physiological and behavioural needs in addition to its expectations. This state can vary depending on the animal’s perception of a given situation1 a. An animal feels needs but also has expectations. It is capable of experiencing both positive and negative feelings based on responses to these expectations and needs; 1a Opinion of the French Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health and Safety (ANSES); February 2018 at https://www.anses.fr/fr/content/avis-de- lanses-relatif-au-%C2%AB%C2%A0bien- %C3%AAtre-animal-contexte- d%C3%A9finition-et-%C3%A9valuation- %C2%BB

Amendment 47 #

Draft opinion
Recital A g (new)

Ag. whereas in the EU nearly 120 million rabbits are commercially farmed, of which almost all of them are confined to cages for their entire lives; whereas in the EU over 350 million laying hens are commercially farmed, of which almost half of them are kept in overcrowded cages with no more space than an A4 sheet of paper; whereas in the EU around 11 million sows have to give birth and suckle their piglets in a cage; whereas in the EU at least 140 million quail are kept in cages in which they are unable to perform basic behaviour; whereas in the EU around 40 million ducks and geese are annually imprisoned in cages during their lives for the production of foie gras; whereas in the EU around 20 million dairy calves are born every year, of which more than half of these are kept in small, individual pens away from their mother;

Amendment 48 #

Aurélia BEIGNEUX, Catherine GRISET, Annika BRUNA, Laura HUHTASAARI, Sylvia LIMMER

Draft opinion
Recital A g (new)

Ag. whereas the EU Regulation on official controls requires Member States to audit their systems for official inspections on feed and food law and animal health and welfare, and Commission Decision 2006/677/EC sets out guidelines recommending that such audits are conducted at least every five years;

Amendment 49 #

Draft opinion
Recital A g (new)

Ag. whereas unfair competition in the farming sector from outside of the EU is one of the indirect causes of the deterioration in animals’ living conditions caused by the drive for profitability;

Amendment 5 #

Draft opinion
Recital A

A. whereas industrial livestock farming plays a prominent role in EU agriculture, a~~s it is not only economically and environmentally, but also culturally highly significant for EU regions~~nd in just over a decade several million farms have ceased to exist, representing over a third of all farms in Europe, of which the vast majority were small family businesses, due to upscaling and intensification of the agricultural system;

Amendment 50 #

Draft opinion
Recital A h (new)

Ah. whereas it has been found that the General Directive has generally been less impactful than the species-specific Directives, due to the vague nature of the requirements and the large margins of interpretation it has allowed and the absence of species-specific protections for dairy cows, broiler and hen breeders, rabbits, sheep and turkeys;

Amendment 51 #

Aurélia BEIGNEUX, Catherine GRISET, Annika BRUNA, Laura HUHTASAARI

Draft opinion
Recital A h (new)

Ah. whereas Thailand, Brazil and Ukraine, account altogether for 90 % of the imports from third countries that have all been subjected to audits by DG SANTE and that highlighted a large number of significant deficiencies in the production process and in observing EU legislation;

Amendment 52 #

Draft opinion
Recital A h (new)

Ah. whereas when the Suez Canal was blocked by the cargo ship Ever Given this forced many vessels to wait out at sea for several days. Ships carrying live animals were among these vessels; whereas such a situation is unacceptable for animals;

Amendment 53 #

Aurélia BEIGNEUX, Catherine GRISET, Annika BRUNA, Laura HUHTASAARI, Sylvia LIMMER

Draft opinion
Recital A i (new)

Ai. whereas more than 2.8 million live cattle, sheep and goats were exported by sea from the EU Member States to countries in the Mediterranean region in 2018. This figure is made up of over 625 000 head of cattle and 2.2 million sheep and goats (56 % of them from Romania) that were shipped to countries such as Turkey, Syria, Jordan, Egypt, or Libya, according to an April 2020 report by the European Commission;

Amendment 54 #

Draft opinion
Recital A i (new)

Ai. whereas moving away from intensive livestock farming practices towards sustainable, extensive agriculture will deliver an immense reduction in methane emissions from the agricultural sector while also providing benefits for the environment, biodiversity, animal welfare and public health; whereas drastically reducing the number of animals kept in the EU for agriculture is an essential step in this process;

Amendment 55 #

Draft opinion
Recital A i (new)

Ai. whereas important changes in animal husbandry are required to reconcile the Union's animal welfare legislation with other EU policies such as the Farm to Fork and biodiversity strategies, the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the Paris Agreement;

Amendment 56 #

Draft opinion
Recital A j (new)

Aj. whereas EU farmers, as well as NGOs, have expressed concerns over the economic, social and environmental impacts of imports of cheaply produced chicken meat and misleading labelling of chicken meat processed in the European Union, but originating from third countries; whereas unfair competition and a failure to comply with EU standards places European businesses at a competitive disadvantage;

Amendment 57 #

Aurélia BEIGNEUX, Catherine GRISET, Annika BRUNA, Laura HUHTASAARI, Sylvia LIMMER

Draft opinion
Recital A j (new)

Aj. whereas adapting our diets and drastically reducing the production and consumption of animals while developing alternative protein sources to substitute meat, dairy and other animal products is a cost-effective, quick, healthy and easy measure to fight methane-induced climate change and will realise countless co- benefits for human, animal and ecosystem health and welfare;

Amendment 58 #

Draft opinion
Recital A k (new)

Ak. whereas in 2016, the Directorate- General for Health and Food Safety consulted EU citizens to gather their opinions on animal welfare within the EU; whereas, too, 94 % of the EU citizens questioned were of the view that protecting the welfare of farm livestock is important; whereas, finally, 82 % of EU citizens were of the view that the welfare of farm livestock should be better protected than it is at present;

Amendment 59 #

Ak. whereas the special 2016 Eurobarometer on animal welfare showed that 94% of EU citizens believe that welfare of farm animals is important, 82% think farm animals should be better protected and 59% are willing to pay 5% more for animal- friendly products;

Amendment 6 #

Draft opinion
Recital A

A. whereas livestock farming plays a ~~prominent~~ role in EU agriculture, as it is ~~not only~~of economic~~ally and environmentally, but also culturally highly~~, social and cultural significantce for EU regions;

Amendment 60 #

Draft opinion
Recital A k (new)

Ak. whereas there are grave concerns regarding the poor welfare, high stress levels, high mortality and morbidity of farm rabbits in Europe, as already concluded by EFSA in 2005; whereas the detrimental effects on the welfare of farm rabbits are often the result of poor housing systems and cages;

Amendment 61 #

Draft opinion
Recital A l (new)

Al. whereas the agricultural subsidies to promote agricultural products inside and outside the EU drastically increased the past years, namely to 142,5 million euros in 2017, 188.5 million euros in 2018 and 200 million euros in 2020;

Amendment 62 #

Draft opinion
Recital A m (new)

Am. whereas animals should no longer be adapted to the system, but the system should be adapted to the animals’ needs and behaviour instead, meaning that it should not be allowed to hurt an animal, cause injury to an animal or harm the health or welfare of an animal with the aim of housing the animal in a certain way;

Amendment 63 #

Draft opinion
Recital A m (new)

Am. whereas in recent decades, European food and farming have become heavily unbalanced and unsustainable in favour of industrial agricultural systems and intensive livestock farming;

Amendment 64 #

Draft opinion
Recital A m (new)

Am. whereas industrial animal farming is incompatible with animal welfare due to extreme suffering as well as cruel practices experienced by animals;

Amendment 65 #

Draft opinion
Recital A m (new)

Am. whereas animal farming is one of the main sources of human-induced greenhouse gas emissions, accounting for 14.5% of the total according to FAO;

Amendment 66 #

Draft opinion
Recital A m (new)

Am. whereas the spread of zoonotic diseases such as avian and swine flu, or Salmonella, and air pollution from ammonia emissions (90% of which comes from farming, according to the European Environment Agency) are major public health risks linked to intensive animal farming;

Amendment 67 #

Draft opinion
Recital A m (new)

Am. whereas a sustainable and more organic diet will accelerate the achievement of the Green Deal objectives while protecting our climate and environment, people’s health, farmers’ livelihoods and farm animal welfare, both in Europe and worldwide;

Amendment 68 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Welcomes the Commission’s efforts to consolidate legislation on animal welfare and animal health and ensure that the requirements are clear and fit to protect all farmed animals during rearing, transport and slaughter; stresses that these requirements must be applied correctly and uniformly throughout the EU and that regular and comprehensive checks must be carried out, and EU-harmonised sanction systems put forward; welcomes the Commission’s planned revision of legislation in this area in 2023 in keeping with the objectives of the Farm to Fork Strategy, by reversing intensification in animal production and significantly reducing the stress at the time of transport, slaughter as well as during culling operations;

Amendment 69 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Welcomes the Commission’s ~~efforts~~commitment to consolidate legislation on animal welfare and animal health, taking into account the latest advancements in animal welfare science and responding to public, political and market demands for higher animal welfare standards, and ensure that the requirements are clear; 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~~animal welfare legislation in keeping with the objectives of the Farm to Fork Strategy, but urges the Commission to already deliver concrete proposals by 2022;

Amendment 7 #

Draft opinion
Recital A

A. whereas traditional extensive livestock farming plays a prominent role in EU agriculture, as it is not only economically ~~and environmentally, but also culturally highly significant for EU region~~important and it can work in synergy with environmental goals, but it is also culturally highly significant for EU regions; whereas this is threatened by intensive forms of production which the current policy environment helps make profitable; calls for all policy instruments coherently working towards support of the traditional European cultural landscape, adoption of regenerative models such as agro-ecology and organic systems, contribution towards objectives of the Green Deal, high animal welfare and phasing out of support for intensive production units;

Amendment 70 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Welcomes the Commission’s efforts to consolidate legislation on animal welfare and animal health and ensure that the requirements are clear; 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 with the objectives of the Farm to Fork Strategy; emphasises that changes made in the area of animal welfare must not undermine the economic sustainability of livestock farms;

Amendment 71 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Welcomes the Commission’s ~~efforts to consolidate legislation on animal welfare and animal health and ensure that the requirements are clear; stresses that these requirements must~~goal to halve sales of antimicrobials for farmed animals and in aquaculture by 2030; stresses that antimicrobial resistance (AMR)is a growing transnational, cross- border public health threat where coordinated EU action on animal welfare should be prioritised; takes note of the Commission’s efforts to consolidate legislation on animal welfare and animal health and ensure that the requirements are clear; stresses that these requirements must include a ban on the use of all cages in EU animal farming by 2027 at the latest; underlines the urgent need for a clear definition animal welfare and of intensive animal farming in the EU legal system should be applied correctly and uniformly throughout the EU and that regular and comprehensive checks on terrestrial and aquatic animal production must be carried out; welcomes the Commission’s planned revision of legislation in this area in 2023 in keeping with the objectives of the Farm to Fork Strategy; calls on the Commission to urgently revise Council Directive 98/58/EC concerning the protection of animals kept for farming purposes and Regulation (EC) No. 1/2005 on the protection of animals during transport to harmonise and integrate animal welfare with the SDGs and Paris Agreement;

Amendment 72 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. ~~Welcom~~Urges the Commission~~’s efforts to consolidate~~ to advance the revision of legislation on animal welfare and animal health and ensure that the requirements ~~are clear~~lead 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 with~~emphasises 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 73 #

1. Welcomes the Commission’s efforts to consolidate and optimize legislation on animal welfare and animal health, without delay, and ensure that the requirements are clear and well-defined; stresses that these requirements must be applied correctly and uniformly throughout the EU and that regular and comprehensive checks must be carried out in line with the applicable legislation; welcomes the Commission’s planned revision of legislation in this area in 2023 in keeping with the objectives of the Farm to Fork Strategy, particularly as on-farm animal welfare is recognised in the Strategy as being central to contribute at reducing reliance on the excessive use of veterinary medications, at protecting human health and at helping preserve biodiversity;

Amendment 74 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Welcomes the Commission’s efforts to consolidate legislation on animal welfare and animal health and ensure that the requirements are clear; 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 with the objectives of the Farm to Fork Strategy; points out that changes to legislation must be made gradually, be based on science and provide the financial support necessary to ensure that farms can be transformed without putting their survival at risk;

Amendment 75 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Welcomes the Commission’s efforts to consolidate legislation on animal welfare and animal health and to ensure that ~~the requirements are clear; stresses~~it is clear and fit for purpose; stresses that these requirements must include a ban on the use of all cages in EU animal farming by 2027, that these requirements must be applied correctly and uniformly throughout the EU and that regular and comprehensive checks must be carried out, breaches duly investigated and sanctioned accordingly; welcomes the Commission’s planned revision of legislation in this area inby 2023 in keeping with the objectives of the Farm to Fork Strategy;

Amendment 76 #

Chrysoula ZACHAROPOULOU, Pascal CANFIN, Martin HOJSÍK, Pascal DURAND

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Deeply regrets that a number of issues related to Regulation (EC) No 1/2005 are yet to be resolved, including: overcrowding; insufficient headroom; failure to provide the required rest stops, food and water; inadequate ventilation and watering devices; transport in extreme heat; transport of unfit animals; transport of unweaned calves; the need to ascertain the pregnancy status of live animals; the extent to which the journey logs are checked; the ‘mixed’ impact of training, education and certification; and insufficient bedding, as identified by the European Court of Auditors in its Special Report No 31/2018;

Amendment 77 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Recalls that the COVID 19 pandemic has showed the interconnection between the health of humans, animals and the environment as evidenced notably by the case of animals bred for their fur; insists on the need to improve animal health in animal agriculture as part of the One Health approach ; calls on the European Commission to also develop the One Welfare approach as part of the revision of the legislation on animal welfare;

Amendment 78 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Draws the attention to the fact that, in line with the concept of One Health, animal welfare is many ways related to human health, for instance in terms of zoonotic spread risk or in terms of animal product consumption;

Amendment 79 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Stresses that consistently applying the One Health Principle can improve on- farm animal welfare;

Amendment 8 #

Draft opinion
Recital A

A. whereas livestock farming plays a prominent role in EU agriculture, as it is not only economically and environmentally, ~~but also culturally highly significant for EU reg~~significant, but also an integral part of the EU human culture and society, contributing to the preservation of the Member States’ ancient local traditions;

Amendment 80 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. With a view to the One Health approach, welcomes the Commission’s goal to halve sales of antimicrobials for farmed animals and in aquaculture by 2030; points to the fact that to achieve this goal, improved animal husbandry practices are essential, as better animal welfare improves animal health, thus reducing the need for medication;

Amendment 81 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Notes that the EU Directives on on-farm animal welfare are found to be outdated, often inadequate, too vague, lacking specific protections and providing exceptions or derogations to requirements, resulting into a number of undesirable practices violating the welfare of animals that have continued to be allowed;

Amendment 82 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Rejects the disinformation campaigns and false data that regularly besmirch the reputation of the European livestock sector; calls for recognition of the efforts and investments that European livestock farmers have made over the last decade to raise animal welfare standards in European production;

Amendment 83 #

Aurélia BEIGNEUX, Catherine GRISET, Annika BRUNA, Laura HUHTASAARI, Sylvia LIMMER

1a. Acknowledges the importance of the Commission external study on animal welfare labelling foreseen to start first half of 2021; in this regard, calls on the Commission to assess a reliable traceability mechanism of animals and animal products to apply also to animal source foods from non-EU countries;

Amendment 84 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Points out that the Member States should be able to prohibit the sale of products within their territory that they consider to be injurious to animal welfare, even if said products are authorised in other Member States;

Amendment 85 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1b. Notes that 70 billion farm animals are kept worldwide and transported globally on an ever-increasing scale, and that the industrial livestock system, by concentrating large amounts of fragile and stressed animals in confined spaces, is one of the major risk factors of the outbreak and the spreading of zoonoses and poses therefore great danger to public health; is therefore of the opinion that the EU needs to swift away from the continued intensification of the livestock production to regional and small-scale food production;

Amendment 86 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1b. Notes that billions of farm animals transported globally on an increasing scale, and in Europe, there are millions of farmed animals caged for part or all of their lives are restricted to small confined spaces making it impossible for those animals to exhibit their natural behaviours; reiterates that the current industrial livestock model that confines thousands of animals into confined spaces, is a major contributing factor to zoonoses; in that regard, considers that the EU needs to move away from the intensification of livestock production towards a more extensive model that priorities the animals health and welfare instead of relying on the routine use of antimicrobials or other hazardous chemicals;

Amendment 87 #

Chrysoula ZACHAROPOULOU, Pascal CANFIN, Martin HOJSÍK, Pascal DURAND

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1b. Reiterates the need to regulate specific species that currently remain unprotected by EU animal welfare legislation; respondents underlined the importance of introducing species-specific legislation: for dairy cattle; laying hens, breeders and broilers, beef cattle, pullets, turkeys, ducks geese, farmed rabbits; farmed fish; sheep and goats; calls on Commission to bring forward proposals in that regard;

Amendment 88 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1b. Takes note of the citizens' initiative "End the Cage Age" and calls for the revision of Directive 98/58 which would provide for a phasing out of cage farming systems as soon as possible as well as adequate measures to support farmers in this transition and ensure a fair level playing field;

Amendment 89 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1b. Supports the ECI “End the Cage Age” and urges the Commission to start a legislative process to ban caged farming;

Amendment 9 #

Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)

Aa. whereas, as significant developments in animal welfare science have taken place since the existing EU farm animal welfare legislation was adopted, it is vital to revise and augment the existing body of animal welfare legislation to bring it into line with the latest scientific advancements and to respond to societal demands for improvement of the welfare of animals and the elimination of outdated livestock housing systems and other production practices that negatively impact their welfare;

Amendment 90 #

Aurélia BEIGNEUX, Catherine GRISET, Annika BRUNA, Laura HUHTASAARI, Sylvia LIMMER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1b. Demands that EU trade policy take into account the significant differences between European animal welfare standards and those of third countries, in order to prevent unfair competition from imported products without the minimum animal welfare guarantees;

Amendment 91 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1b. Regrets that after having banned certain practices within its territory on animal welfare grounds, a Member State can be forced to accept in the name of the single market the marketing of foreign products that contravene this ban;

Amendment 92 #

Chrysoula ZACHAROPOULOU, Pascal CANFIN, Martin HOJSÍK, Pascal DURAND

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)

1c. Stresses that legislation relating to the welfare of farm animals must be species specific and should be compatible with scientific data relating to animal sensitivity and be updated as scientific knowledge evolves;

Amendment 93 #

Aurélia BEIGNEUX, Catherine GRISET, Annika BRUNA, Laura HUHTASAARI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)

1c. Calls on the Commission to make animal welfare a ground permitting derogation from the single market, as is the case for health, environment or consumer protection;

Amendment 94 #

Aurélia BEIGNEUX, Catherine GRISET, Annika BRUNA, Laura HUHTASAARI, Sylvia LIMMER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 d (new)

1d. Regrets the decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 1 October 2020 in which the Court prevented the imposition by Member States of a mandatory label mentioning the geographical origin of milk; recalls that the mention of the geographic origin is conducive to better informing consumers and improving animal welfare, while ensuring farmers a better remuneration;

Amendment 95 #

Aurélia BEIGNEUX, Catherine GRISET, Annika BRUNA, Laura HUHTASAARI, Sylvia LIMMER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 d (new)

1d. Notes that large scale industrial fish farming and aquaculture in particular relies heavily on the use of antibiotics to combat infectious diseases as edwardsiellosis, streptococcosis and acute hepatopancreatic necrosis disease, which tend to increase with warmer temperatures and threaten food security;

Amendment 96 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 e (new)

1e. Calls therefore on the Commission to put forward an amendment to Regulation No 1169/2011, and its Articles 26, 38 and 39 in particular, in order to permit Member States to impose labelling mentioning the geographical origin of all foodstuffs;

Amendment 97 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

~~2. Welcomes the Council’s efforts to promote the development of an EU animal welfare label based on harmonised and technically substantiated criteria;~~deleted

Amendment 98 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Welcomes the Council’s ~~effort~~conclusions to promote the development of an EU-wide animal welfare label for as many food producing animals as possible, based on harmonised and technically substantiated criteria;

Amendment 99 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Welcomes the Council’s efforts to ~~promote~~introduce 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;

source: 694.997

2021/07/22 AGRI 412 amendments...

Amendment 1 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 a (new)

— having regard to Article 13 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Amendment 10 #

Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ, Christine SCHNEIDER, Michal WIEZIK, Franc BOGOVIČ

Motion for a resolution
Citation 8

— having regard to the study requested by European Parliament’s PETI Committee ‘End the cage age: Looking for alternatives’ (November 2020), its resolution of 10 June 2021 on the European Citizens’ Initiative ‘End the Cage Age’ (2021/2633 (RSP)), and to Commission Communication - C(2021)4747 of 30 June 2021,

Amendment 100 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital N

N. whereas the laying hens directive has ~~been a success; whereas this success is limited, however, given the broad range of approac~~shown insufficient progress and it did not meet the real needs of laying hens a~~pplied by the Member States to~~nd gradually put pressure on change, which its ~~implementation, which has distorted competition in the single market;~~why alternatives to a cage housing system1a began to be used more in individual Member States; _________________ 1aEuropean Union; End the cage age: Looking for alternatives, 2020; https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/ etudes/STUD/2020/658539/IPOL_STU(20 20)658539_EN.pdf

Amendment 101 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital N

N. whereas the laying hens directive has been a success; whereas this success is limited, however, ~~given the broad range of approaches applied by the Member States to its implementation, which has distorted~~because of the distortions to competition in the single market;

Amendment 102 #

Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ, Simone SCHMIEDTBAUER, Christine SCHNEIDER, Daniel BUDA, Asim ADEMOV, Franc BOGOVIČ

Motion for a resolution
Recital N

N. whereas the success of the laying hens directive has been ~~a success; whereas this success is limited, however~~limited, given the broad range of approaches applied by the Member States to its implementation~~, which has distorted competition in the single market~~ and given the lack of clear, mandatory and comprehensive provisions;

Amendment 103 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital N a (new)

Na. whereas it is in the interests of both farmers and consumers to ensure equal conditions in the internal market and at the same time equal conditions for imports of products from third countries;

Amendment 104 #

Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ, Christine SCHNEIDER, Asim ADEMOV, Michal WIEZIK, Franc BOGOVIČ

Motion for a resolution
Recital O

~~O. whereas working conditions have improved for laying-hen and veal farmers but not necessarily for pig farmers;~~deleted

Amendment 105 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital O a (new)

Oa. whereas European parliament adopted the resolution of 10 June 2021 on the European Citizens’ Initiative ‘End the Cage Age’ with the objective of phasing out the use of cages in EU animal farming by 2027;

Amendment 106 #

Jérémy DECERLE, Irène TOLLERET, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI, Alin MITUȚA

Motion for a resolution
Recital O a (new)

Oa. whereas targets for sow housing were not attained, thereby still leaving the premises too cramped and stressful, without sufficient enrichment material;

Amendment 107 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital P

~~P. whereas a distinction should be drawn between anecdotal cases of non- compliance, which are the focus of too much attention, and the vast majority of farmers who follow the rules;~~deleted

Amendment 108 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital P

P. whereas ~~a distinction should be drawn between anecdotal~~there are documented cases of non- compliance~~, which are the focus of too much atten~~ - in some cases widespread - which shows the need to produce fit-for-purpose legislation, and ~~the vast majority of~~ensure compliance, to ensure a level playing field for those farmers who do follow the rules;

Amendment 109 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital P

P. whereas a ~~distinc~~ttention should ~~be drawn between anecdotal~~remain on the cases of non- compliance~~, which are the focus of too much attention, and the vast majority of farmers who follow the rules~~ that reveal enormous animal suffering and systemic inhumane treatment of animals, as exposed by multiple investigations, including inspections by the Commission;

Amendment 11 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 8 a (new)

— having regard to the Commission Communication of 30 June 2021 on the European Citizens' Initiative ‘End the Cage Age’ (C(2021)4747),

Amendment 110 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital P a (new)

Pa. whereas the surgical castration of pigs is still routinely practiced despite the Brussels Declaration where different actors of the farming and the food chain committed to end the surgical castration of pigs by 1st January 2018;

Amendment 111 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital P a (new)

Amendment 112 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital P a (new)

Pa. whereas documentation from whistleblowers has on occasion served to expose cases of non-compliance and raise awareness of the need to make animal welfare legislation fit-for-purpose;

Amendment 113 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital Q

Q. whereas livestock farming methods and production systems vary among the Member States;

Amendment 114 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital Q

Q. whereas ~~livestock~~animal production farming methods vary among the Member States;

Amendment 115 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital Q

Q. whereas ~~livestock~~animal production farming methods vary among the Member States;

Amendment 116 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital Q a (new)

Qa. whereas there are over 300 million farmed animals each year caged for part or all of their lives, and there are grave concerns throughout the EU regarding the welfare of animals reared and farmed in cages, as animals are not even able to stand straight, to stretch or to turn around and it is impossible for animals kept in cages to exhibit their natural behaviour;

Amendment 117 #

Jérémy DECERLE, Irène TOLLERET, Hilde VAUTMANS, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI, Alin MITUȚA, Emma WIESNER, Elsi KATAINEN

Motion for a resolution
Recital Q a (new)

Qa. whereas the European agricultural demography is experiencing an alarming decline; whereas an insufficient generational renewal would have an undesirable effect on the implementation of animal welfare norms;

Amendment 118 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital Q b (new)

Qb. whereas in the EU nearly 120 million rabbits are commercially farmed, of which almost all of them are confined to cages for their entire lives; whereas in the EU over 350 million laying hens are commercially farmed, of which almost half of them are kept in overcrowded cages with no more space than an A4 sheet of paper; whereas in the EU around 11 million sows have to give birth and suckle their piglets in a cage; whereas in the EU at least 140 million quail are kept in cages in which they are unable to perform basic behaviour; whereas in the EU around 40 million ducks and geese are annually imprisoned in cages during their lives for the production of foie gras; whereas in the EU around 20 million dairy calves are born every year, of which more than half of these are kept in small, individual pens away from their mother;

Amendment 119 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital R

R. whereas our agricultural, environmental and ~~commercial strategies~~international trade strategies and measures to ensure a level playing field within the single market should be coherent;

Amendment 12 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 8 a (new)

— having regard to the European Court of Auditors' Special Report No 31/2018 on animal welfare in the EU,

Amendment 120 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital R

R. whereas our agricultural, environmental and commercial strategies should be coherent, complementary and appropriate;

Amendment 121 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital R

R. whereas ~~our~~the European Union's agricultural, environmental and commercial strategies should be coherent;

Amendment 122 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital R

R. whereas ~~our~~ agricultural, and environmental ~~and commercial~~ strategies in the EU should be coherent;

Amendment 123 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital S

S. whereas the common agricultural policy (CAP) is one of the regulatory tools that can be used to improve the welfare of farm animals, however, as noted in the Commission’s evaluation of the latest Animal Welfare Strategy, Member States have neglected to take full advantage of the funds for animal welfare purposes, and millions of euros in EU rural development funds available for improving animal welfare are currently unused or poorly used;

Amendment 124 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital S

S. whereas the common agricultural policy (CAP) is one of the regulatory and financial tools that can be used to improve the welfare of farm animals, although other financing, in addition to the CAP, is also required in order to make progress in this direction;

Amendment 125 #

Jérémy DECERLE, Irène TOLLERET, Hilde VAUTMANS, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI, Alin MITUȚA, Emma WIESNER, Elsi KATAINEN

Motion for a resolution
Recital S

S. whereas the common agricultural policy (CAP) is one of the regulatory tools that can be used to improve the welfare of farm animals, notably through eco- schemes as well as by means of supporting investments;

Amendment 126 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital S

S. whereas the common agricultural policy (CAP) is one of the regulatory tools that can be used to improve the health and welfare of farm animals;

Amendment 127 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital S

S. whereas the common agricultural policy (CAP) is one of the ~~regulatory~~stimulus tools that can be used to improve the welfare of farm animals;

Amendment 128 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital S a (new)

Sa. whereas livestock farming is the main beneficiary of second pillar aid to farms in disadvantaged areas, which make up 50% of the European UAA, and of Agro-Environmental Measures, which compensate for the additional costs linked to unfavourable location or the obligations of having to respect specific legislation2a; _________________ 2ahttps://op.europa.eu/en/publication- detail/-/publication/04af47b0-0c38-11eb- bc07-01aa75ed71a1/language-en

Amendment 129 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T

T. whereas particular attention should be paid to ensuring that ~~our~~consistent political decisions ~~do not weaken~~lead the European livestock- production sector~~, which would lead to~~ to shift to higher quality, lower quantity production, in line with environmental, animal welfare and dietary concerns, whilst avoiding the relocation of production to other parts of the world where livestock conditions and standards are lower than in Europe, and to other, connected problems;

Amendment 13 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 9 a (new)

— having regard to the opinion of the European Committee of the Regions on the Common Agricultural Policy adopted on 5 December 2018 (CDR 3637/2018),

Amendment 130 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T

T. whereas particular attention should be paid to ensuring that our political decisions do not weaken the European livestock-production sector, which would lead to the relocation of production to other parts of the world where livestock conditions and standards are lower than in Europe, and to other, connected problems, detrimental not only to the animal welfare standards, but also to the European environmental objectives;

Amendment 131 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T

T. whereas particular attention should be paid to ensuring that our political decisions do not weaken the European livestock-production sector or result in a reduction in production, which would lead to the relocation of production to other parts of the world where livestock conditions and standards are lower than in Europe, and to other, connected problems;

Amendment 132 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T

T. whereas particular attention should be paid to ensuring that ~~our political decisions do not weaken the European livestock-production sector, which would lead to the relocation of production to o~~the EU will support a shift towards a plant-based and less and better animal-based products consumption, better animal welfare during the whole production cycles, and ther p~~arts of the world where livestock conditions and standards are lower than in Europe, and to other, connected problems~~romotion of higher animal welfare standards both internationally and on the domestic market;

Amendment 133 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T

T. whereas particular attention should be paid to ensuring that ~~our political decisions do not weaken the European livestock-production sector, which would lead to the relocation of production~~the Union will support a shift towards less and better animal-based products' consumption, and better animal welfare during the whole production cycles; and to other p~~arts of the world where livestock conditions and standards are lower than in Europe, and to other, connected problems~~romotion of higher animal welfare standards both internationally and on the domestic market;

Amendment 134 #

Carmen AVRAM, Attila ARA-KOVÁCS, Juozas OLEKAS, Paolo DE CASTRO

Motion for a resolution
Recital T a (new)

Ta. whereas in the coming years a range of increased risk factors for stability and for cost-effectiveness of agricultural production in the EU can be expected to have a cumulative effect; such as the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the EU, reduction of the overall EU budget including the CAP, systemic reform of the CAP along with additional criteria for subsidies, the Green Deal Strategy and its reduction targets and the unprecedented scale of increase in environmental ambition, and the prospective prohibition of cage farming by 2027, as well as negative global demographic trends and the rapidly growing problem of farm abandonment;

Amendment 135 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T a (new)

Ta. whereas consumer interest in the quality of food purchased is higher than ever, and whereas food quality in relation to animal welfare and animal health has an important part to play in achieving the goals of the Farm-to-Fork Strategy;

Amendment 136 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T a (new)

Ta. whereas a reduction of the number of farm animals kept in the EU, especially in the industrial livestock sector, should be incentivised along with a strategy to increase the production and consumption of plant-based food;

Amendment 137 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T b (new)

Tb. whereas the production and consumption of animal products accounts for a major share of resource use and significantly impacts animal health and welfare, public health, the climate and the environment;

Amendment 138 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital U

U. whereas labelling can only be effective if it is easy for consumers to understand, designed for an integrated single market ~~and~~, underpinned by a coherent EU trade policy and is truly feasible for our producers without overly onerous implementation costs or constraints;

Amendment 139 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital U

U. whereas labelling can only be effective if it is mandatory, science based, easy for consumers to understand and to make an informed choice, designed for an integrated single market applied to all animal products and underpinned by a coherent EU trade policy to prevent the entering of products on the market produced by lower standards;

Amendment 14 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 9 a (new)

— having regard to the Council Conclusions of 7 December 2020 on an EU-wide animal welfare label (13691/20),

Amendment 140 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital U

U. whereas labelling can only be effective if it is easy for consumers to understand, designed for an integrated single market and underpinned by a coherent EU trade policy; whereas research and public consultation findings show that stakeholders are not fully behind the proposal for mandatory labelling;

Amendment 141 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital U

U. whereas labelling can only be effective if it is easy for consumers to understand, does not have additional economic implications for food sector operators, especially farmers, and is designed for an integrated single market and underpinned by a coherent EU trade policy;

Amendment 142 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital U

U. whereas labelling can only be effective if it is easy for consumers to understand, designed for an integrated single market and underpinned by a coherent EU trade policy; whereas such labelling must also help create market openings for producers;

Amendment 143 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital U

U. whereas labelling can only be effective if it is easy for consumers to understand, ~~design~~harmonised for an integrated single market, applied to all animal products, and underpinned by a coherent EU trade policy;

Amendment 144 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital U

U. whereas labelling can only be effective if it is easy for consumers to understand, designed for an integrated single market applied to all animal products, and underpinned by a coherent EU trade policy;

Amendment 145 #

Carmen AVRAM, Attila ARA-KOVÁCS, Juozas OLEKAS, Paolo DE CASTRO

Motion for a resolution
Recital U a (new)

Ua. whereas only voluntary labelling will earn rewards on the market in the absence of differentiation by the latter based on production characteristics, which means that mandatory labelling will be perceived as having force of law;

Amendment 146 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital U a (new)

Ua. whereas the uptake of smart farming technologies to continuously monitor animal health and welfare has the potential to ensure effective disease prevention and the implementation of animal welfare standards;

Amendment 147 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital U b (new)

Ub. whereas the adoption of DNA traceability technologies to track and trace every sick animal or infected food has the potential to ensure food safety and prevent food fraud by ensuring consumers;

Amendment 148 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital V

V. whereas information tools for consumers should be designed in such a way as to maintain a level playing field, and a harmonised approach which is currently hampered by the welter of private initiatives using unprotected animal welfare terms and claims for varying standards;

Amendment 149 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital V

Amendment 15 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 9 b (new)

— having regard to the opinion of the European Committee of the Regions on Agro-ecology adopted on 5 February 2021 (CDR 3137/2020),

Amendment 150 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital V

V. whereas information tools for consumers should be designed in such a way as to maintain a level playing field, which ~~is currently hampered by the welter of private initiatives~~requires a degree of harmonisation;

Amendment 151 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital V a (new)

Va. whereas an animal welfare related label can only be truly transparent if it is mandatory and labels all animal products from minimum EU legislative standards to premium levels;

Amendment 152 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital W

W. whereas the aim in legislative action ~~on labelling~~ should be to harmonise and improve the implementation of regulations and standards;

Amendment 153 #

Jérémy DECERLE, Irène TOLLERET, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI, Alin MITUȚA, Asger CHRISTENSEN

Motion for a resolution
Recital W a (new)

Wa. whereas a diet rich in plant-based foods and with fewer animal source foods confers both improved health and environmental benefits, and transformation to healthy diets by 2050 will require substantial dietary shifts, whereas global consumption of fruits, vegetables, nuts and legumes will have to double, and consumption of foods such as red meat and sugar will have to be reduced by more than 50% in order to achieve dietary shifts towards less resource-intensive products (more plant based, less refined);

Amendment 154 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital W a (new)

Wa. whereas the majority of animal welfare labelling schemes are initiated by the private sector, and the rest are the result of public-private partnerships or, to a lesser extent, initiatives by National Competent Actors in some EU members;

Amendment 155 #

Jérémy DECERLE, Irène TOLLERET, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI, Alin MITUȚA, Emma WIESNER

Motion for a resolution
Recital W b (new)

Wb. whereas industrial livestock farming results in high greenhouse gas emissions, soil degradation, air pollution, water contamination and biodiversity loss, and agriculture is responsible for about 90% of EU ammonia emissions, which has significant negative effects on the environment and biodiversity, and is a major contributor to the air pollution that kills 400,000 European citizens each year;

Amendment 156 #

Jérémy DECERLE, Irène TOLLERET, Hilde VAUTMANS, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI, Alin MITUȚA, Asger CHRISTENSEN, Elsi KATAINEN

Motion for a resolution
Recital W b (new)

Wb. whereas the systems observed in the EU are voluntary; whereas most of them include aspects other than animal welfare, such as traceability, sustainability, and health; whereas they vary greatly in terms of operation and design;

Amendment 157 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital W c (new)

Wc. whereas there is no consensus on the prospect of mandatory animal welfare labelling rules, mainly due to the economic implications arising from their implementation, in particular for livestock farmers; whereas even if mandatory rules were to even out certain irregularities on the European market, they would have a dampening effect on private initiatives aimed at creating product differentiation and the use of animal welfare as a commercial lever;

Amendment 158 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital W c (new)

Wc. whereas moving away from intensive livestock farming practices towards sustainable, extensive agriculture will deliver an immense reduction in methane emissions from the agricultural sector while also providing benefits for the environment, biodiversity, animal welfare and public health; whereas drastically reducing the number of animals kept in the EU for agriculture is an essential step in this process;

Amendment 159 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital W d (new)

Wd. whereas adapting our diets and drastically reducing the production and consumption of animals while developing alternative protein sources to substitute meat, dairy and other animal products is a cost-effective, quick, healthy and easy measure to fight methane-induced climate change and will realise countless co- benefits for human, animal and ecosystem health and welfare;

Amendment 16 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 11

— having regard to the opinion of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety on the implementation report on on-farm animal welfare,

Amendment 160 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital W e (new)

We. whereas a method-of-production and origin labelling can only be truly transparent if it is mandatory, labels all animal products, is species-specific and covers all the stages of the life of the animal, and includes the farming, transport, and slaughter methods;

Amendment 161 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 (new)

-1 Notes that the EU Directives on on-farm animal welfare are found to be outdated, often inadequate, too vague, lacking specific protections and providing exceptions or derogations to requirements, resulting into a number of undesirable practices violating the welfare of animals that have continued to be allowed;

Amendment 162 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 a (new)

-1a. Stresses that, in the context of food safety, environmental protection, climate action, animal welfare and equality between Member States, the Commission must at all times ensure strict enforcement of European legislation and calls on the Commission to make more and better use of infringement procedures in this regard, including strong sanctions;

Amendment 163 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 a (new)

-1 a Welcomes the Commission’s evaluation and revision of the animal welfare legislation by 2023, including on animal transport and the slaughter of animals, that aims to align it with the latest scientific evidence, broaden its scope, make it easier to enforce and ensure a higher level of animal welfare, as stated in the Farm to Fork strategy;

Amendment 164 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 b (new)

-1b. Expresses its concerns over the in effective implementation and enforcement of current EU legislation related to the welfare of animals;

Amendment 165 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 c (new)

-1c. Notes that 70 billion farm animals are kept worldwide and transported globally on an ever-increasing scale, and that the industrial livestock system, by concentrating large amounts of fragile and stressed animals in confined spaces, is one of the major risk factors of the outbreak and the spreading of zoonoses and poses therefore great danger to public health; is therefore of the opinion that the EU needs to swift away from the continued intensification of the livestock production to regional and small-scale food production;

Amendment 166 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

~~1. Acknowledges the great strides made by livestock farmers on their farms, particularly in improving animal welfare, and their drive and commitment to forward thinking and progress;~~deleted

Amendment 167 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Acknowledges the ~~great strides made by livestock~~attempts made by animal production farmers on their farms, particularly in improving animal welfare, and their drive and commitment of some of them to forward thinking and progress;

Amendment 168 #

Colm MARKEY

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Acknowledges the great strides made by livestock farmers on their farms, particularly in improving animal welfare, and their drive and commitment to forward thinking and progress;

Amendment 169 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Acknowledges the ~~great~~ strides made by some livestock farmers on their farms, particularly in improving animal welfare, and their drive and commitment to forward thinking and progress;

Amendment 17 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 11 a (new)

— having regard to its initiative report of 8 June 2021 on the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030: Bringing nature back into our lives (2020/2273(INI)),

Amendment 170 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Acknowledges that the development of some farming methods and technologies aiming at increasing production and/or reducing production costs have and have had negative consequences on the welfare of the animals; regrets that the intensification in animal production, which is the result of a business model largely relying on exports, is a significant obstacle to the welfare animals farmed in the European Union;

Amendment 171 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Acknowledges that the development of some farming methods and technologies aiming at increasing production and/or reducing production costs, have, and have had, negative consequences on the welfare of animals, and regrets that the intensification in animal production, which is the result of a business model largely relying on exports, is a significant obstacle to the welfare animals farmed in the EU;

Amendment 172 #

1a. Acknowledges that the development of certain farming methods and technologies aiming at increasing production and/or reducing production costs have negative consequences on the welfare of the animals; Regrets that the intensification in animal production, which is the result of a agricultural model focusing on exports, runs counter to animal welfare;

Amendment 173 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Stresses the continuous process of modernising farms and the significant investments made with the aim of consolidating high standards of animal welfare and health;

Amendment 174 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Acknowledges that stockbreeders are engaged in an ongoing investment cycle owing to recent animal welfare initiatives and long amortisation periods;

Amendment 175 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1b. Stresses that the genetic selection of rapid growth or high producer breeds and the widespread use of those breeds in EU agriculture has adverse consequences on animal welfare; calls for greater genetic diversity of breeds on farms, including ‘dual purpose’ animals and slower growing breeds; recognises such diversification can contribute to sustainability objectives and improve resilience against illness; calls on the EU to phase out breeding lines which results in pain and animal health problems such as fast growing poultry breeds, sows with oversized litters, high yield dairy cows, and high yield laying hen hybrids;

Amendment 176 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)

Amendment 177 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1b. Recognises that the Covid-19 pandemic is a stark reminder of the interconnectivity of human, animal and planetary health and expresses deep concern that intensive agriculture, through its contribution to biodiversity loss and climate change, is a leading driver of pandemics, as well as posing a direct threat to human health through the spill-over of zoonotic diseases from animals kept in close proximity to each other for industrial farming practices;

Amendment 178 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 c (new)

1c. Recognises that the Covid-19 pandemic is a stark reminder of the interconnectivity of human, animal and planetary health; expresses deep concern that intensive agriculture, through its contribution to biodiversity loss and climate change is a leading driver of pandemics as well as posing a direct threat to human health through the spill- over of zoonotic diseases from livestock;

Amendment 179 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 c (new)

1c. Recognises that the Covid-19 pandemic is a reminder of the relation of human, animal and planetary health; expresses concern that intensive agriculture is a risk factor in further pandemics, due to its role in biodiversity loss and climate change, as well as posing a direct threat to human health through the spill-over of zoonotic diseases from livestock;

Amendment 18 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 12 a (new)

— having regard to the opinion of the European Committee of the Regions on the Common Agricultural Policy adopted on 5 December 2018 (CDR 3637/2018),

Amendment 180 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 c (new)

1c. Underlines the key role that the EU should play in supporting the development of agro-ecological and plant- based agricultural practices;

Amendment 181 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 d (new)

1d. Stresses the need for urgent and bold policy and legislative change in the face of overwhelming scientific evidence of the unsustainability of the current food system and the higher costs of a failure to act, paying full regard to the welfare of farm animals, given that this is integral to food sustainability, and recommends that it includes measures to stimulate the adoption of higher animal welfare standards, a reduction of the amount of farm animals and stocking densities, and an increase of the production and consumption of plant-based products at the same time;

Amendment 182 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 e (new)

1e. Stresses the need to swiftly move away from industrial animal farming by a significant reduction of the amount of animals kept in the EU, aiming at a 70% reduction in livestock numbers in the EU, with particular focus on Member States with high livestock density such as the Netherlands, Belgium and Denmark;

Amendment 183 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 f (new)

1f. Urges the revision of Council Directive 98/58/EC concerning the protection of animals kept for farming purposes, which sets down generic rules that have proved difficult to implement and enforce, suggests therefore transposing this Directive into a Regulation, thereby creating the possibility of delivering delegated and implementing acts to set down welfare requirements for species for which no species-specific EU minimum standards presently exist, including dairy cattle, beef cattle, sheep, goats, turkeys, ducks, geese, rabbits, farmed fish, quail and all of their offspring;

Amendment 184 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 g (new)

1g. Notes that broiler chickens are the most numerous terrestrial farmed animals in the EU, of which the vast majority coming from intensive farming systems, while their welfare is currently insufficiently guaranteed by the various pieces of EU legislation as they do not address the main problems that are intrinsic to this industry such as the welfare problems of ever fast-growing broiler chickens;

Amendment 185 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 h (new)

1h. Stresses that the genetic selection of rapid growth or high producer breeds and the widespread use of those breeds in EU agriculture has adverse consequences on the welfare of the animals concerned; calls for greater genetic diversity of breeds on farms, including ‘dual purpose’ animals and slower growing breeds; recognises such diversification can contribute to sustainability objectives and improve resilience against illness; calls on the EU to phase out breeding lines which result in pain and animal health problems such as fast growing poultry breeds, sows with oversized litters, high yield dairy cows, and high yield laying hen hybrids;

Amendment 186 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 i (new)

1i. Urges the revision of Council Directive 2007/43/EC laying down minimum rules for the protection of chickens kept for meat production in order to introduce specific animal welfare measures applicable to hatcheries and for the protection of broiler breeders, to specify a complete range of mandatory and verifiable animal-based indicators for the monitoring of welfare of individual chickens on farm (including parent stock) and at slaughter, in accordance with point (e) of Article 21(8) and Article 96(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/625, to adopt improved environmental and husbandry standards (including the use of higher welfare broiler breeds, rapid growth issue, lower stocking densities without derogations, a ban on thinning to one instance per flock, provision of adequate enrichments, sufficient natural light, fresh air, enrichments and perch space, and stricter air quality parameters and reduce the sector’s dependency on antibiotics) and to establish a ban on the rearing of extremely fast-growing chickens; reiterates its call to accelerate a shift to alternative rearing systems that use higher welfare or traditional broiler breeds, which are more robust and healthy than fast-growing breeds, and to not allow any import products that do not meet EU standards;

Amendment 187 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 j (new)

1j. Calls on the Commission to commission a roadmap towards alternative and small-scale broiler chicken rearing systems that guarantee higher welfare and/or traditional broiler breeds, with particular attention to the reduction in prevalence and spread of antimicrobial-resistant infectious zoonotic agents, the reduction in use of antimicrobials that are important for human health, in line with the One Health Action Plan against antimicrobial resistance;

Amendment 188 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 k (new)

1k. Urges the revision of Council Directive 1999/74/EC laying down minimum standards for the protection of laying hens in order to rapidly phase-out and prohibit enriched battery cages and introduce cage-free systems for all laying hens, to create a level-playing field and at the same time improve the welfare of animals kept in the EU;

Amendment 189 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 l (new)

1l. Disapproves the unethical and systematic killing of billions of male chicks in the EU every year, whether by using a shredding machine or carbon dioxide gas, as it is a violation of animal welfare law; emphasizes that France and Germany already announced a ban on the systematic killing of male chicks and urges the Commission and the Member States to follow this example;

Amendment 19 #

Jérémy DECERLE, Irène TOLLERET, Hilde VAUTMANS, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI, Alin MITUȚA, Elsi KATAINEN, Martin HLAVÁČEK

Motion for a resolution
Citation 12 a (new)

— having regard to the Special Eurobarometer 505 entitled 'Making our food fit for the future - Citizens' expectations',

Amendment 190 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 m (new)

1m. Calls on the Commission to propose specific EU legislation on minimum standards for the protection of farmed rabbits, as they are the second most farmed species in the EU in terms of numbers of animals, with a majority of them reared in cages with inadequate welfare standards;

Amendment 191 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 n (new)

1n. Stresses that, although a large proportion of sheep and goats are reared in extensive farming conditions, such as on pasture land, significant concerns exist regarding animal welfare in intensive goat and sheep farming; underlines the alarming situation of male goat-kids that are treated as a waste product, and already transported and slaughtered when only a few days old, as well as problems as mutilations, lameness, transport problems and diseases caused by communicable diseases, and calls on the Commission to address these concerns in the upcoming revision of animal welfare legislation;

Amendment 192 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 o (new)

1o. Is concerned that there hasn't been any significant improvement for the welfare of male goat kids and that both percentages and actual numbers of male goat kids that suffer from very poor health, or even die, are still unacceptably high; calls on the Member States concerned to draw up an action plan in which concrete targets are set established for the prevention of disease and death among male goat kids and in which the welfare and intrinsic value of both the goats and their surplus are preconditions;

Amendment 193 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 p (new)

1p. Points out that duck farming causes several structural and serious welfare problems to ducks and poses a high risk of bird flu outbreaks, and is therefore of the opinion that the Commission and the Member States should end duck farming in case the meat for which ducks are reared and killed is almost exclusively destined for export;

Amendment 194 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 q (new)

1q. Reiterates its call on the Commission to bring forward proposals to ban the cruel and unnecessary force- feeding of ducks and geese for the production of foie gras;

Amendment 195 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 r (new)

1r. Is deeply concerned by the stable fires occurring in the EU that lead to the horrid death of animals and the release of toxic fumes; calls on the Commission and the Member States to tackle the problem of stable fires by promoting best practices and by introducing fire safety requirements, including preventive measures and mandatory sprinkler installations, measures which guarantee that animals can escape from their stables in the event of fire and a ban on air washing installations, as livestock barns do not only tend to be very prone to fire due to dust, straw and manure gases, but air washing installations, and their ventilation systems, are also flammable and rapidly spread the fire due to fanning;

Amendment 196 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Recommends giving all livestock farmers the means, via an EU-level framework, to take part in a process of progress, based on objective and scientifically substantiated indicators referring to the five fundamental freedoms defined by the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE); acknowledges that this is dependent on measures to ensure the necessary additional resources coupled with fair market prices;

Amendment 197 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Recommends giving all ~~livestock~~animal production farmers the means, via an EU- level framework, to take part in a process of progress, based on ~~objective indicators referring to~~ the f“Five ~~fundamental freedoms defined by the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE)~~Domain” model;

Amendment 198 #

Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ, Christine SCHNEIDER, Asim ADEMOV, Michal WIEZIK, Franc BOGOVIČ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Recommends giving all ~~livestock~~animal production farmers the means, via an EU- level framework, to take part in a process of progress, based on ~~objective indicators referring to the five fundamental freedoms defined by the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE~~the “Five Domain” model (nutrition, environment, health, behaviour and mental state);

Amendment 199 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Acknowledges the Commission's decision to complete the impact assessment of the ban on cage farming prepared by EFSA in 2022 and the revision of animal welfare legislation, including Directive 98/58/EC, by 2023;

Amendment 2 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 a (new)

— having regards to Art. 13 of the TFEU,

Amendment 20 #

Jérémy DECERLE, Irène TOLLERET, Hilde VAUTMANS, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI, Alin MITUȚA, Asger CHRISTENSEN, Elsi KATAINEN

Motion for a resolution
Citation 12 b (new)

— having regard to the 'Five Freedoms' described by the OIE (World Organisation for animal health), namely : freedom from hunger, malnutrition and thirst, freedom from fear and distress, freedom from heat stress or physical discomfort, freedom from pain, injury and disease, and freedom to express normal patterns of behaviour,

Amendment 200 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Calls for any future legislative initiative (whether the establishment of new legislation or a review of existing texts) entailing an amendment or change to the livestock-raising system (including accommodation) to be based on sound, recent scientific data derived from research grounded in a systemic approach and not focused on any single aspect of sustainability; advocates for balance to be maintained and for scientific advice on how the desired changes will affect the animals, the environment and the farmers to be followed; emphasises the need to carry out impact assessments before taking any decisions and the need to develop a species by species approach in order to lay down requirements that are specific to different types of livestock farm;

Amendment 201 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Calls for any future legislative initiative (whether the establishment of new legislation or a review of existing texts) entailing an amendment or change to the livestock-raising system (including accommodation) to be based on sound, recent scientific data derived from research grounded in a systemic approach and not focused on any single aspect of sustainability; advocates for balance to be maintained ~~and~~, for scientific advice on how the desired changes will affect the animals, the environment and the farmers to be followed, and for the competent bodies of the Member States to be consulted as early as possible in the legislative process;

Amendment 202 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Calls for any future legislative initiative (whether the establishment of new legislation or a review of existing texts) entailing an amendment or change to the livestock-raising system (including accommodation) and livestock welfare criteria to be based on sound, recent scientific data derived from research grounded in a systemic approach and not focused on any single aspect of sustainability; advocates for balance to be maintained and for scientific advice on how the desired changes will affect the animals, the environment and the farmers, especially small farmers, to be followed;

Amendment 203 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Calls for any future legislative initiative (whether the establishment of new legislation or a review of existing texts) entailing an amendment or change to the livestock-raising system (including accommodation) to be based on sound, recent scientific data or studies derived from research grounded in a systemic approach and ~~not focused on any single aspect of sustainability~~to take all aspects into account in order to achieve sustainability and animal welfare; advocates for balance to be maintained and for scientific advice on how the ~~desired changes~~changes that are to be introduced will affect the animals, the environment and the farmers to be followed;

Amendment 204 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Calls for any future legislative initiative (whether the establishment of new legislation or a review of existing texts) entailing an amendment or change to the livestock-raising system (including accommodation) to be based on sound, recent scientific data derived from research grounded in a systemic approach and not focused on any single aspect of sustainability; advocates for balance to be maintained and for scientific advice on how the desired changes will affect the ~~animal~~farmers, the ~~environment and the farmers~~overall economy of the sector, the animals and the environment to be followed;

Amendment 205 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Calls for any future legislative initiative (whether the establishment of new legislation or a review of existing texts) entailing an amendment or change to the ~~livestock~~animal-raising system (including accommodation) to be based on sound, recent scientific data derived from research grounded in a systemic approach ~~and not focused on any single aspect of sustainability~~; advocates for balance to be maintained and for scientific advice on how the desired changes will affect the animals, the environment and the farmers to be followed;

Amendment 206 #

Carmen AVRAM, Attila ARA-KOVÁCS, Juozas OLEKAS, Paolo DE CASTRO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Calls for any future legislative initiative (~~whether~~including the establishment of new legislation orand a review of existing texts) entailing an amendment or change to the ~~livestock~~animal-raising system (including accommodation) to be based on sound, recent scientific data derived from research grounded in a systemic approach and not focused on any single aspect of sustainability; advocates for balance to be maintained and for scientific advice on how the desired changes will positively affect the animals, the environment and the farmers to be followed;

Amendment 207 #

3a. Is aware of the fact that EFSA produced several opinions on the use of animal-based measures for species not covered by specific legislation (dairy cows and beef cattle) in response to the European Commission mandates; regrets the fact that these animal-based measures issued by EFSA have not been implemented so far; calls therefore on the European Commission to make sure these animal-based measures are updated with the latest scientific knowledge and integrated in the existing specific legislation;

Amendment 208 #

Carmen AVRAM, Attila ARA-KOVÁCS, Juozas OLEKAS, Paolo DE CASTRO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3b. Acknowledges that, as noted by scientific bodies, animal-based measures, though desirable, are not always enforceable and objectively verifiable; calls therefore on the European Commission, in the context of the revision of the European animal welfare legislation, to formulate very specific verifiable requirements in light of the latest scientific opinions and of the various production systems across Member States;

Amendment 209 #

Carmen AVRAM, Attila ARA-KOVÁCS, Juozas OLEKAS, Paolo DE CASTRO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 c (new)

3c. Welcomes the six objectives set out in the European Union Strategy for the Protection and Welfare of Animals 2012- 2015 and acknowledges that these objectives are still relevant3a; regrets though that the impact of the Strategy was very limited due to the lack of outcome indicators or quantifiable plans for tracking the progress of the Strategy actions, which contributed to a reduced level of accountability for the Strategy’s success; encourages, therefore, the European Commission to prepare a new strategy, with an output-oriented approach, as a proper environment to gather Member States’ representatives, scientific bodies, stakeholders, farmers and NGOs and exchange views and best practices in view of a more uniformed implementation of the animal welfare legislation across Member States, in line with the Green Deal objectives; _________________ 3ahttps://op.europa.eu/en/publication- detail/-/publication/1e912399-3905-11eb- b27b-01aa75ed71a1/language-en/format- PDF/source-178300128

Amendment 21 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 12 b (new)

— having regard to the opinion of the European Committee of the Regions on Agro-ecology adopted on 5 February 2021 (CDR 3137/2020),

Amendment 210 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Calls on the Commission to update animal welfare rules in the light of scientific progress in this field and to establish minimum welfare standards for food-producing species that are presently not covered by species-specific legislation;

Amendment 211 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Calls on the Commission to ~~update animal welfare rules~~ensure that the existing animal welfare legislation is complied with and to update rules, if necessary, to require a better match with society’s current demands, in the light of scientific progress in this field;

Amendment 212 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Calls on the Commission to update animal welfare rules in the light of scientific progress in this field, by embedding the "Five Domains" model and the ‘One Welfare’ approach, as well as the objectives of the Farm to Fork Strategy;

Amendment 213 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Calls on the Commission to update animal welfare rules in the light of scientific progress in this field, and by embedding the five domains model and the ‘One Welfare’ approach as well as the Farm to Fork Strategy;

Amendment 214 #

Carmen AVRAM, Attila ARA-KOVÁCS, Juozas OLEKAS, Paolo DE CASTRO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Calls on the Commission to update animal welfare rules in the light of scientific progress and research findings in this field;

Amendment 215 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Welcomes the setting up of EU reference centres dedicated to the welfare of different species and categories of animals (EURCAWs), as part of the EU Strategy for the Protection and Welfare of Animals 2012-2015; encourages the European Commission to further develop the network of EURCAWs, especially for species not covered by the specific legislation, as an effective platform of coherent and uniform dissemination across Member States of technical information on the way the EU legislation should be implemented, in areas such as outcome-based animal welfare indicators, common requirements for competence of personnel handling animals, increasing transparency and adequacy of information to consumers on animal welfare;

Amendment 216 #

Colm MARKEY

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Notes that continued increase in standards of animal welfare and other areas of regulation while always welcome places extra burden on compliant farmers. Primary consideration should always be given to ensuring compliance and consistency with existing standards as a first step to ensure that the least compliant farmers are brought up to, and are compliant with the existing standards in advance of additional burdens being placed on progressive farmers;

Amendment 217 #

4a. Calls for stronger harmonisation of the legal framework for animal husbandry in the EU, using common, science-based animal welfare indicators and welcomes the Commission’s commitment to revise the existing animal welfare legislation, but urges the Commission to already deliver concrete proposals by 2022;

Amendment 218 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Calls for the revised animal welfare legislation to be fully aligned with the priorities of the EU Green Deal and the Farm to Fork Strategy, broadening its scope and flexibility to adapt to the latest scientific and technological developments;

Amendment 219 #

Jérémy DECERLE, Irène TOLLERET, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI, Alin MITUȚA, Asger CHRISTENSEN, Elsi KATAINEN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Denounces the practice of crushing male chicks while they are alive and calls on the Commission to propose and promote alternative solutions that are more animal welfare-friendly;

Amendment 22 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 12 c (new)

— having regard to the Article 13 of the TFEU '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 220 #

Carmen AVRAM, Attila ARA-KOVÁCS, Juozas OLEKAS, Paolo DE CASTRO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)

4b. Notes that the current EU legislation on animal welfare is not all inclusive and invites the European Commission to assess the need and impact for specific animal welfare legislation, in light of the latest scientific knowledge, for species not covered, in particular for goats, sheep, pullets, dairy and beef cattle, rabbits, turkeys, broiler and laying hen breeders and farmed fish;

Amendment 221 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)

4b. Points out that the EU citizens are increasingly concerned about the welfare of animals, especially the welfare of animals kept in the livestock industry;

Amendment 222 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Recalls that changes must be made after scientific evaluation and with a view to meeting citizens’ needs, with due account for consumers’ choices and purchasing power; points out that the feedback received from the EU stakeholders within the fitness check roadmap, including citizens from across the EU, confirms the call for further species specific legislation, highlighting the protection of dairy cattle, broilers, rabbits, sheep, turkeys, farmed fish as well as the ban on the use of all cages;

Amendment 223 #

Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ, Simone SCHMIEDTBAUER, Christine SCHNEIDER, Daniel BUDA, Asim ADEMOV, Franc BOGOVIČ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Recalls that changes must be made after scientific evaluation and with a view to meeting citizens’ needs, with due account for consumers’ choices and purchasing power; recalls that our European food system should provide access to affordable, high-quality food; emphasises that producers should not as a consequence have to bear additional costs resulting from improving animal welfare;

Amendment 224 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Recalls that changes must be made after scientific evaluation and with a view to meeting citizens’ needs, with due account for consumers’ choices and purchasing power; calls for shorter supply chains in human nutrition, relying on locally or regionally produced food to provide consumers with better direct access to local food and to support small farmers;

Amendment 225 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Recalls that changes must be made ~~after~~in accordance with scientific evaluation of animals' needs and with a view to ~~meeting citizens’ needs, with due account for consumers’ choices and purchasing power~~improving the welfare of animals and meeting citizens’ needs, expectations and concerns in relation to on-farm animal welfare, and the interrelated impact on public and animal health;

Amendment 226 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Recalls that changes must be made after scientific evaluation and with a view to meeting, on the one hand, the challenges facing stockbreeders and, on the other, citizens’ needs, with due account for consumers’ choices and purchasing power;

Amendment 227 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Recalls that changes must be made after appropriate scientific evaluation ~~and with a view to meeting citizens’ needs, with due account for consumers’ choices and~~, having regard to citizens’ needs and the health and welfare of animals, with due account for the best choices for consumers and their purchasing power;

Amendment 228 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Recalls that changes must be made ~~after~~in accordance with scientific evaluation and with a view to meeting citizens’ needs and expectations, with due account for consumers’ choices and purchasing power;

Amendment 229 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Recalls that changes must be made after scientific evaluation and in consultation with competent bodies in EU Member States, as well as with a view to meeting citizens’ needs, with due account for consumers’ choices and purchasing power;

Amendment 23 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 12 c (new)

— having regard to its initiative report of 8 June 2021 on the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030: Bringing nature back into our lives (2020/2273(INI)),

Amendment 230 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Recalls that changes must be made ~~after~~in accordance with scientific evaluation and with a view to meeting citizens’ needs~~, with due account for consumers’ choices and purchasing power~~ and expectations;

Amendment 231 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Calls on the Commission to ensure that the CAP fully recognises animal sentience and holistically addresses environmental and public health challenges associated with poor animal welfare practices;

Amendment 232 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5b. Calls on the Commission to support the development of a new sustainable food policy that recognises the improvement of farm animal welfare, in conjunction with the uptake of the production and consumption of plant- based food;

Amendment 233 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 c (new)

5c. Underlines that reducing the production and consumption of meat and dairy products will make a significant positive contribution to the climate, environment. public health and animal health and welfare and should be incentivised as a key factor in the fight against climate change;

Amendment 234 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 d (new)

5d. Stresses the importance of promoting sustainable plant-based diets in line with the objectives of the EU Farm to Fork Strategy, by raising consumer awareness of the impacts of consumption patterns on human health, animal welfare and the environmental footprint;

Amendment 235 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Urges lawmakers to familiarise themselves with and be fully aware of the consequences of these developments; calls for changes to be assessed using a holistic approach taking in the social, environmental and economic components of sustainability, as well as ergonomics for farmers and health-related aspects; recalls that animal welfare must be coupled with an economic approach if it is to prove successful in the long runRecalls that animal welfare must be coupled with an sustainable economic approach if it is to prove successful in the long run; notes that EU funds have to incentivise continuous improvements and they shall be allocated for producers shifting to farming systems that integrate higher welfare standard;

Amendment 236 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Urges lawmakers to familiarise themselves with and be fully aware of the positive consequences of ~~these~~ developments; calls for changes to be assessed using a holistic approach taking in the social, environmental and economic components of sustainability, as well as ergonomics for farmers and health-related aspects; ~~recalls that animal welfare must be coupled with an economic approach if it is to prove successful in the long run;~~

Amendment 237 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Urges lawmakers to familiarise themselves with and be fully aware of the consequences of these developments; calls for changes to be assessed using a holistic approach taking in the social, environmental, animal welfare and economic components of sustainability, as well as ergonomics for farmers and health- related aspects, especially taking into account the One Health approach; recalls that animal welfare must be coupled with an sustainable economic approach ~~if it is to prove successful in the long run~~;

Amendment 238 #

6a. Demands the introduction of measures to guarantee the safety of farmers and their integrity in the event of certain actions being taken in respect of animals;

Amendment 239 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. ~~Stresses that any change must be considered in the light of the time needed for livestock farmers to implement it and the inertia it may entail~~Acknowledges that changes on- farm to positively impact animal welfare need appropriate transition periods, while emphasizing the need to ensure that animal welfare does not suffer under new measures for the agricultural sector, and stresses that no measures, targets, or incentives should lead to a restriction of livestock animals to indoor confinements, as animals must have the opportunity to graze and roam outdoors and should not be prevented from exhibiting their natural behaviour;

Amendment 24 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 12 d (new)

— having regard to the recent note of the Council ("Agriculture and Fisheries") of 28 June 2021 calling for a permanent prohibition of fur farming in the EU,

Amendment 240 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Stresses that any change must be considered in the light of the time needed for livestock farmers to implement it and the inertia it may entail; stresses the need to take particular account of investment costs, given the low profit margins and long payback periods;

Amendment 241 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Stresses that any change must be considered in the light of the time needed for livestock farmers to implement it and the inertia it may entail; highlights the fact that any changes to legislation must be made gradually and proportionately;

Amendment 242 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Stresses that any change must be considered in the light of the time needed for livestock farmers to implement it, the economic and bureaucratic implications thereof and the inertia it may entail;

Amendment 243 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Stresses that any change must be considered in the light of the time, support and financing needed for livestock farmers to implement it and the inertia it may entail;

Amendment 244 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. ~~Stress~~Notes that ~~any~~ change ~~must b~~s to improve con~~sidered in the light of the time needed for livestock farmers to implement it and the inertia it may entail~~- farm animal welfare need an appropriate transition period;

Amendment 245 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Stresses that any change must be considered in the light of the economic consequences for the farms and the time needed for livestock farmers to implement it ~~and the inertia it may entail~~;

Amendment 246 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. ~~Stress~~Acknowledges that for any change ~~must be considered in the light of the time needed for livestock farmers to implement it and the inertia it may entail~~s on-farm to positively impact animal welfare, they need appropriate transition periods;

Amendment 247 #

Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ, Christine SCHNEIDER, Asim ADEMOV, Franc BOGOVIČ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Calls on the Commission to cease work on the proposal to limit cage farming as proposed in the ‘End the Cage Age’ Initiative; considers complete prohibition of cage farming in the EU by 2027 for all of the mentioned species, namely laying hens, rabbits, pullets, broiler breeders, layer breeders, quail, ducks and geese, and piglets, as well as cattle pens, to be a radical, reckless solution that is detrimental to the continuity of supply chains and the cost- effectiveness of agricultural production; recommends that the EC focus its activities instead on enhancing food security and making the EU agricultural market more robust;

Amendment 248 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. ~~Warns~~Points out that any potential changes to cages will need to be accompanied by precise and unambiguous definitions of what constitutes a cage; urges the Commission, as part of the implementation of the new legislation, to precisely and clearly define the conditions for the breeding of individual species of animals, including facilities for their breeding, which will be based on examples of good practices of alternative housing systems; in preparing new legislation, the Commission should consider impact studies that identify the increased costs of these farms, as well as the risks associated with the spread of disease, increased stress and aggressive animal behaviour2a; emphasizes that alternative breeds can eliminate these negative elements in the long run; it is necessary to create a system of effective breeding, where animals live in favourable conditions and are also economically prosperous for breeders; _________________ 2aEuropean Union; End the cage age: Looking for alternatives, 2020; https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/ etudes/STUD/2020/658539/IPOL_STU(20 20)658539_EN.pdf

Amendment 249 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. W~~arns that any potential changes to cages will need to be~~elcomes the European Citizens' Initiative “End the Cage Age” and emphasizes the precise and unambiguous definition of what constitutes a cage, starting from the basic definition of a cage as a system of confinement in which animals cannot display basic natural behaviour (such as swalking/hopping/flying/foraging/dustbat hing/resting) in ac com~~panied by precise and unambiguous definitions of what constitutes a cage~~fortable manner and as they choose to, and benefit from with their own species; welcomes in this regard the Commissions' commitment to phase out and finally prohibit the use of cages for all the animal species and categories referred to in the initiative, namely laying hens, sows, calves, rabbits, pullets, broiler breeders, layer breeders, quail, ducks and geese, as part of the ongoing revision of the animal welfare legislation;

Amendment 25 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 12 e (new)

— having regard to the Commission’s strategic guidelines for sustainable and competitive EU aquaculture,

Amendment 250 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Warns that any potential changes to cages will need to be accompanied by precise and unambiguous definitions of what constitutes a cage; in order to provide for an effective transition to alternative housing systems that are already commercially viable and in use such as barn, free range and organic systems for hens, park systems, floor pens, outdoor free-range and organic systems for rabbits, free-farrowing and group housing systems for sows, barn and aviary systems for quail or pair and group housing systems for calves;

Amendment 251 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Warns that any potential changes to cages farming will need to be accompanied by precise and unambiguous definitions of what constitutes a cage; in addition, phasing out cage rearing could, for instance, increase the risk of spreading infectious diseases among farm animals and increase the stress caused by territorial dominance and rivalry, which is harmful to their health;

Amendment 252 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. W~~arns that any potential changes to cages will need to be accompanied by precise and unambigu~~elcomes the ECI “End the Cage Age” and calls for a precise and unambiguous definition of what constitutes a cage, starting from the basic definition of a cage as a system of confinement in which animals cannot display basic natural behaviours ~~definitions of what constitutes a cage;~~ (such as walking/hopping/flying/foraging/dustbath ing/resting) in a comfortable manner and as they choose to, and benefit from being with their own species;

Amendment 253 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. W~~arns that any potential changes to cage~~elcomes the ECI 'End the Cage Age'; highlights that the shift to cage-free systems will need to be accompanied by ~~precise and unambiguous~~clear and precise definitions of what constitutes a cage, starting from the basic definition of a cage as a system of confinement in which animals cannot display basic natural behaviours to the extent they desire;

Amendment 254 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Warns that any potential changes to cages will need to be accompanied by precise and unambiguous definitions of what constitutes a cage and its characteristics for different species;

Amendment 255 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Stresses that the market for animal products from cage-free, free range and organic systems, as well as the market for plant-based alternatives, is growing in the EU;

Amendment 256 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Recalls that investments in improved animal welfare may incur higher production costs, no matter the type of livestock farming concerned; notes that~~, unless~~ these costs need to be covered by financial aid or a return on investment from the market~~, the rise in production costs means that farmers will not be able to invest in animal welfare~~; recalls that according to Eurobarometer 442 Europeans recognise a price premium is justified for animal welfare-friendly products, considering the level of investment required to implement new standards and legislation, and concluded that the majority of Europeans are prepared to pay more for products sourced from animal welfare-friendly production systems;

Amendment 257 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Recalls that investments in improved animal welfare incur higher production costs, no matter the type of livestock farming concerned; notes that, unless covered by financial aid or a return on investment from the market, the rise in production costs means that farmers will not be able to invest in animal welfare; for this reason it also advocates that any raising of animal welfare standards take place gradually and in a responsible manner, based on a system of financial incentives, including using funds outside the CAP budget;

Amendment 258 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Recalls that investments in improved animal welfare incur higher production costs, no matter the type of livestock farming concerned; notes that, unless covered by financial aid or a return on investment from the market, the rise in production costs means that farmers will not be able to invest in animal welfare; urges the European Commission to decide on appropriate financial support for stockbreeders so as to encourage them to invest in improved animal welfare;

Amendment 259 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Recalls that investments in improved animal welfare incur higher production costs, no matter the type of livestock farming concerned; notes that, unless covered by financial aid or a return on investment from the market, the rise in production costs means that farmers will not be able to invest in animal welfare; urges the Commission to address these shortcomings as a matter of urgency and to encourage and implement sustainable improvements in the remuneration of efforts made by farmers;

Amendment 26 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas animal welfare ~~is a sensitive~~, an important consideration for our farmers, is and increasingly important issue for consumers and in our society in general;

Amendment 260 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Recalls that investments in improved animal welfare incur higher production costs, no matter the type of livestock farming concerned; notes that~~, unless covered by financial~~ additional public aid, or a clear return on investment from the market, must be set out, otherwise the rise in production costs ~~means that farmers will not be able to~~will make it difficult or prevent farmers from investing in animal welfare, which would be an undesirable situation;

Amendment 261 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Recalls that investments in improved animal welfare incur higher production costs which the farmer does not pass on to the consumer, no matter the type of livestock farming concerned; notes that, unless covered by financial aid or a return on investment from the market, the rise in production costs means that farmers will not be able to invest in animal welfare;

Amendment 262 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Recalls that investments in improved animal welfare may incur higher production costs, no matter the type of livestock farming concerned; notes that~~, unless covered by financial aid or a~~ these higher costs need to be covered by return on investments from the market~~, the rise in production costs means that farmers will not be able to invest in animal welfare~~ or financial aids;

Amendment 263 #

Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ, Simone SCHMIEDTBAUER, Christine SCHNEIDER, Asim ADEMOV, Franc BOGOVIČ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Recalls that investments in improved animal welfare may incur higher production costs, no matter the type of ~~livestock~~animal farming concerned; notes that~~, unless covered by financial aid or a~~ these higher costs need to be covered by return on investments from the market~~, the rise in production costs means that farmers will not be able to invest in animal welf~~ or financial aid if necessarey;

Amendment 264 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Calls for further special financial support for breeders linked to the transition to an alternative housing system for animals in connection with the implementation of new legislation banning cage farming, to which the European Commission committed by 2027 on the basis of a call from the European parliament´s resolution of 10 June 2021 on the European Citizens’ Initiative ‘End the cage age’;

Amendment 265 #

Elsi KATAINEN, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI, Hilde VAUTMANS, Irène TOLLERET, Asger CHRISTENSEN, Emma WIESNER, Jérémy DECERLE, Martin HLAVÁČEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. When enhancing animal welfare legislation in the EU, farmers' income and competitiveness of European livestock producers in the global agricultural market needs to be taken into account;

Amendment 266 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Calls for regulatory burdens to be removed when making structural changes to farms;

Amendment 267 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Calls for financial support to be provided to ~~livestock~~animal production farmers who must effect a transition on their farms, including a reduction in the number of animals and better housing conditions which meet animal physical and behavioural needs, whether by means of public policies (a coherent combination of different tools, including the CAP and the EMFAF) or the market, and for consumers to be provided with clear and transparent information by ensuring mandatory, clear and reliable labelling of all animal products on welfare- related aspects of their entire production cycle – from birth to death; calls, further, for a positive and non- stigmatising communications strategy to be implemented; that is transparent and applied across all animal products;

Amendment 268 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Calls for financial support to be provided to ~~livestock~~animal production farmers who must effect a transition on their farms, including a reduction in the number of animals and better housing conditions which meet animal physical and behavioural needs, whether by means of public policies (a coherent combination of different tools, including the CAP and the EMFAF) or the market, and for consumers to be provided with clear and transparent information by ensuring mandatory, clear and reliable labelling of all animal products on welfare- related aspects of their entire production cycle –from birth to death; calls, further, for a positive and non- stigmatising communications strategy to be implemented that is transparent and applied across all animal products;

Amendment 269 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Highlights that previous CAP funds available within the second pillar were insufficiently allocated to the objective of animal welfare; calls on the Commission to ensure that Member States' strategic plans provide support and direction to farmers in improving animal welfare standards; Calls for financial support to be provided to livestock farmers who must effect a transition on their farms, whether by means of public policies (a coherent combination of different tools, including the CAP) or the market, and for consumers to be provided with clear and transparent information by ensuring clear and reliable labelling of all animal products on welfare- related aspects of the entire production; c~~alls, further, for a positive and non- stigmatising communications strategy to be implemented~~ycle, including the method of production;

Amendment 27 #

Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ, Simone SCHMIEDTBAUER, Christine SCHNEIDER, Daniel BUDA, Asim ADEMOV, Franc BOGOVIČ

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas animal welfare is a sensitive and increasingly important issue in our society, particularly in view of its implications for resulting food quality;

Amendment 270 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Calls for financial support to be provided to livestock farmers who must effect a transition on their farms, whether by means of public policies (a coherent combination of different tools, including the CAP) or the market, and for consumers to be provided with clear and transparent information by ensuring clear and reliable labelling of animal products on welfare- related aspects of their production; calls, further, for a positive and non-stigmatising communications strategy to be implemented; calls on the Commission and the Member States to communicate positively and arouse awareness on the importance and quality of work of farmers and animal breeders and the positive effects of the new animal welfare legislation;

Amendment 271 #

Mara BIZZOTTO, Gilles LEBRETON, Angelo CIOCCA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Calls for financial support to be provided to livestock farmers who must effect a transition on their farms, whether by means of public policies (a coherent combination of different tools, including the CAP) or the market, and for consumers to be provided with clear and transparent information by ensuring clear and reliable labelling of animal products on welfare- related aspects of their production; calls, further, for a positive and non-stigmatising communications strategy to be implemented, particularly for certain traditional regional products, reflecting the expertise of our producers;

Amendment 272 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Calls for financial support to be provided to livestock farmers who must effect a transition on their farms, whether by means of public policies (a coherent combination of different tools, ~~including the CAP~~and/or an ad hoc EU programme of financing or co- financing designed to support the transition on farms) or the market, and for consumers to be provided with clear and transparent information by ensuring clear and reliable labelling of animal products on welfare- related aspects of their production; calls, further, for a positive and non- stigmatising communications strategy to be implemented;

Amendment 273 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Calls for financial support to be provided to livestock farmers who must effect a transition on their farms, whether by means of public policies (a coherent combination of different tools, including the CAP and promotion policies) or the market, and for consumers to be provided with clear and transparent information by ensuring clear and reliable labelling of animal products on welfare- related aspects of their production; calls, further, for a positive and non-stigmatising communications strategy to be implemented;

Amendment 274 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. CUrgently calls for financial support to be provided to livestock farmers who must effect a transition on their farms, whether by means of public policies (a coherent combination of different tools, including the CAP) or the market, and for consumers to be provided with clear and transparent information by ensuring clear ~~and~~, reliable and voluntary labelling of animal products on welfare- related aspects of their production; calls, further, for a positive and non-stigmatising communications strategy to be implemented;

Amendment 275 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10a. Is aware of the limited overall coherence between the European Animal Welfare legislation and the 2014-2020 CAP as well as of the poor integration of the specific legislation into the National Plans for Rural Developments, with wide differences from one Member State to another; welcomes that the European Commission included animal welfare in the List of potential agricultural practices that eco-schemes could support, issued in January 2021; encourages the Member States to draw up animal welfare eco- schemes in their National Strategic Plans and calls on the European Commission to assess the achievability and enforceability of the animal based indicators and measures accompanying these eco- schemes, in order to have an output- oriented approach and to make possible the monitoring, impact and implementation of these schemes;

Amendment 276 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10a. Urges Member States to exclude the possibility of farmers receiving CAP voluntary coupled support for cattle whose final destination is the sale for activities related to bullfighting, by proportionally excluding the number of heads of cattle from payments;

Amendment 277 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Invites the Commission to communicate more effectively on ~~virtuous practices~~good practices by including the minimum EU animal welfare legislative standards on an EU-wide method-of-production and origin labelling, and to assist the ~~livestock~~animal production sector in its efforts to make progress, by supporting the means of implementation, thus respecting the efforts of all stakeholders to get their initiatives off the ground and adopting an encouraging stance;

Amendment 278 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Invites the Commission to communicate more effectively on ~~virtuous~~good practices ~~and to assist the livestock~~by including the minimum EU animal welfare legislative standards on the EU-wide animal welfare label, and to assist the animal production sector in its efforts to make progress, by supporting the means of implementation, thus respecting the efforts of all stakeholders to get their initiatives off the ground and adopting an encouraging stance;

Amendment 279 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Invites the Commission to communicate and help give visibility more effectively ~~on virtuous~~to good practices and to assist the livestock sector in its efforts to make progress, by supporting the means of implementation, thus respecting the efforts of all stakeholders to get their initiatives off the ground and adopting an encouraging stance that incentivises the incorporation of new practices;

Amendment 28 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas animal welfare is an ethically sensitive and increasingly important issue in our society;

Amendment 280 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Invites the Commission to communicate more effectively on virtuous practices and to assist the livestock sector in its efforts to make progress with positive actions, by supporting the means of implementation, thus respecting the efforts of all stakeholders to get their initiatives off the ground and adopting an encouraging stance;

Amendment 281 #

Jérémy DECERLE, Irène TOLLERET, Hilde VAUTMANS, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI, Alin MITUȚA, Elsi KATAINEN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)

11a. Invites the Commission to invest in the welfare of the farmers handling livestock and in the attractiveness of this occupation, with a view to enhancing motivation and productivity amongst settled farmers and future farmers, thereby directly boosting animal welfare;

Amendment 282 #

Carmen AVRAM, Attila ARA-KOVÁCS, Juozas OLEKAS, Paolo DE CASTRO

12. Proposes enhancing training for farmers and operators in the sector handling animals by adding a specific module for initial and ongoing training with a view to honing skills; calls on the Commission to carry out regular reviews of the efforts of the Member States and farmers to improve the quality of education and training and to reward special commitment accordingly; recommends the collation of examples of best practice in the field of education and training and the sharing of these with the Member States by means of annual reports;

Amendment 283 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Proposes enhancing affordable training for farmers and operators in the sector handling animals by adding a specific module for initial and ongoing training with a view to honing skills; takes note of the scientific opinion on the welfare of pigs at slaughter, issued by EFSA in 2020, stating that the majority of the identified hazards originated from actions and behaviours of animal handlers and owners; encourages though Member States to incentivize trainings for farmers and handlers in their National Strategic Plans;

Amendment 284 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Points out that practices intended to improve animal well-being usually incur higher production costs and increase farmers’ workload, and that this must be offset by corresponding remuneration; stresses, by way of example, that phasing in loose housing for pregnant sows would require a 30-year transition period to ensure that the additional costs incurred are recouped from the market, and that the least onerous way of introducing this is to construct new buildings, something that can only be done with the cooperation of the authorities in issuing building permits;

Amendment 285 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Points out that practices intended to improve animal well-being ~~usually~~can incur ~~higher~~in new production costs and increase farmers’ workload, and that this must be offset by corresponding remuneration; stresses, by way of example, that phasing in loose housing for pregnant sows and farrowing crates would require a ~~30-year~~ transition period ~~to ensure that the additional costs incurred are recouped from the market, and that the least onerous way of introducing this is to construct~~and that it might require the construction of new buildings, something that can only be done with the cooperation of the relevant authorities ~~in issuing building permits~~;

Amendment 286 #

Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ, Christine SCHNEIDER, Daniel BUDA, Asim ADEMOV, Franc BOGOVIČ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Points out that practices intended to improve animal well-being usually can incur ~~higher~~in new production costs and increase farmers’ workload, and that this must be offset by corresponding remuneration; stresses, by way of example, that phasing in loose housing for pregnant sows ~~would require a 30-year transition period to ensure that the additional costs incurred are recouped from the market, and that the least onerous way of introducing this is to~~and farrowing crates is much needed and would require a transition period, as it might require the construction of new buildings, something that can only be done with the cooperation of the relevant authorities ~~in issuing building permits~~;

Amendment 287 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Points out that practices ~~intended~~ to improve animal well-being usually incur higher production costs and increase farmers’ workload, and that this must be offset by corresponding remuneration; stresses, by way of example, that phasing in loose housing for pregnant sows would require a 30-year transition period to ensure that the additional costs incurred are recouped from the market, and that the least onerous way of introducing this is to construct new buildings, ~~something that can only be done with~~demands the cooperation of the authorities in issuing building permits and to reduce the administrative burden;

Amendment 288 #

Jérémy DECERLE, Irène TOLLERET, Hilde VAUTMANS, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI, Alin MITUȚA, Martin HLAVÁČEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Points out that practices intended to improve animal well-being usually incur higher production costs and increase farmers’ workload, and that this must be offset by corresponding remuneration; stresses, by way of example, that phasing in loose housing ~~for pregnant sow~~in farrowing units would require a 30-year transition period to ensure that the additional costs incurred are recouped from the market, and that the least onerous way of introducing this is to construct new buildings, something that can only be done with the cooperation of the authorities in issuing building permits;

Amendment 289 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

Amendment 29 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas animal welfare is a ~~sensitive~~n ethical and increasingly important issue in our society;

Amendment 290 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

Amendment 291 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Stresses that ~~some~~ measures ~~believ~~intended to improve animal welfare are in fact counterproductive and may undermine other aspects of sustainability, namely welfare and health safety-related issues, as well as efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions; cites, by way of example, that keeping rabbits in the open air increases stress and mortality levels, and that installing collective cages in rabbitries leads to aggpositively affect the animal health and reduce the need for medication, stimulates disease resistance and can help pressierve b~~ehaviour among does, causing stress, injury and reduced performance~~iodiversity;

Amendment 292 #

Jérémy DECERLE, Irène TOLLERET, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI, Alin MITUȚA, Asger CHRISTENSEN, Martin HLAVÁČEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Stresses that some measures believed to improve animal welfare are in fact counterproductive and may undermine other aspects of sustainability, namely welfare and health safety-related issues, as well as efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions; cites, by way of example, that keeping rabbits in the open air increases stress and mortality levels, and that installing collective cages in rabbitries leads to aggressive behaviour among does, causing stress, injury and reduced performance; points out that outdoor rearing may also lead to a reduced control over droppings and emissions as well as to greater amounts of feed needed, thereby potentially having a greater carbon impact4a; _________________ 4aXin, H. et al., ‘Environmental impacts and sustainability of egg production systems’, Poultry Science, 90(1), 2011, pp. 263-277

Amendment 293 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Stresses that some measures believed to improve animal welfare are in fact counterproductive and may undermine other aspects of sustainability, namely welfare and health safety-related issues, as well as efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions; cites, by way of example, that keeping rabbits in the open air increases stress and mortality levels, ~~and~~ that installing collective cages in rabbitries leads to aggressive behaviour among does, causing stress, injury and reduced performance, and that there is a linear relation between increasing pen dimensions and ammonia emissions leaving the farmers faced with conflicting legislations on animal welfare and environmental issues;

Amendment 294 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Stresses that some measures believed to improve animal welfare ~~are in fact~~may be counterproductive and may undermine other aspects of sustainability, namely welfare and health safety-related issues, as well as efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions; cites, by way of example, that keeping rabbits in the open air increases stress and mortality levels, and that installing collective cages in rabbitries leads to aggressive behaviour among does, causing stress, injury and reduced performanceif they are not developed holistically, taking into account welfare alongside sustainability, and acknowledging and enabling reductions in livestock density where this is necessary;

Amendment 295 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Stresses that some measures believed to improve animal welfare are in fact counterproductive and may undermine other aspects of sustainability, namely welfare and health safety-related issues, as well as efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions; cites, by way of example, that keeping rabbits in the open air increases stress and mortality levels, and that installing collective cages in rabbitries leads to aggressive behaviour among does, causing stress, injury and reduced performance; points out that in fact free cage systems increase mortality among piglets through crushing by more than 15%;

Amendment 296 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

Amendment 297 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Stresses that some measures believed to improve animal welfare are in fact counterproductive and may undermine other aspects of sustainability, namely welfare and health safety-related issues, animal health and the fight against antimicrobial resistance, as well as efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions; cites, by way of example, that keeping rabbits or chickens in the open air increases stress and mortality levels, and that installing collective cages in rabbitries leads to aggressive behaviour among does, causing stress, injury and reduced performance;

Amendment 298 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14a. Points out that the current legislative framework stipulates certain measures, including the provision of suitable livestock accommodation in line with animal health and welfare requirements, designed to ensure that they are treated in accordance with their specific needs at the various stages of their life cycle, while warning that care must be taken not to endanger animal health as a result of the above; calls on the Commission to assess thoroughly the potentially harmful effect of each proposal on animal health and welfare;

Amendment 299 #

Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14a. Notes that, according to scientific research findings, piglet mortality is higher in totally ‘free farrowing’ housing systems than in those requiring sows to be confined in individual pens for a given period of time1a; points out that accommodation in calf igloos and calf pens helps curb the spread of animal diseases and pathogenic infections and prevent debilitation and avoidable mortality among young calves;

Amendment 3 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 a (new)

— having regard to the recent note of the Council l ("Agriculture and Fisheries") of 28 June 2021 calling for a permanent prohibition of fur farming in the EU,

Amendment 30 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas animal welfare is a ~~sensitive and~~ increasingly important ethical issue in our society;

Amendment 300 #

Colm MARKEY

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. ~~Not~~Emphasises the multifaceted complexity of the ~~central, thorny~~serious welfare problem in pig farming, namely tail biting; observes that ~~the~~ technical difficult~~y encountered in the~~ies have been encountered throughout the EU during extensive research into, and analysis of, the risk factors th~~roughout the EU has meant that no reliable solutions whatsoever have been~~at trigger this behaviour. This has meant that no reliable solutions whatsoever have been found thus far. Suggests more scientific research be funded and carried out with the objective of mapping an economically sustainable pathway that will guarantee that pigs can be reared commercially, indoors with long tails. Calls for current legislation to take account of the lack of an alternative solution to existing practices and to allow, in the interests of good pig welfare standards, and to reduce the use of antimicrobials to treat injured pigs, an accommodation until appropriate solutions are found;

Amendment 301 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Notes the ~~multifaceted~~ complexity of the central~~, thorny~~ welfare problem in pig farming, namely tail biting~~; observes that the technical difficulty encountered in the extensive research into and analysis of risk factors throughout the EU has meant that no reliable solutions whatsoever have been found~~ and the consequent widespread practice of tail-docking; observes that tail biting occurs due to the stress, frustration and overall poor welfare experienced by pigs in overcrowded, artificial and stimuli-deprived conditions; stresses that Council Directive 2008/120/EC prohibits routine tail-docking and that the Commission has published guidelines with practical information for farmers to implement to avoid tail biting; regrets that so far only two Member States have prohibited the practice of tail-docking, and the majority of action plans submitted by other Member States contain insufficient detail; Stresses that providing appropriate environmental enrichment, particularly materials that can be manipulated and good animal husbandry, can significantly reduce the problem of tail-biting;

Amendment 302 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. ~~Notes the multifaceted complexity of the centr~~Stresses that the cruel practice of routine tail-docking, due to substandard housing conditions and a lack of effective enrichment materials, thorny welfare problem in pig farming, namely tail biting; observes that the technical difficulty encountered in the extensive research into and analysis of risk factors throughout the EU has meant that no reliable solutions whatsoever have been found; continues to be a serious issue on pig farms in the EU, despite provisions in the EU legislation, namely the Council Directive 2008/120/EC, that ban these practices; is concerned that currently only one Member State has implemented a ban, and observes that there is a wealth of technical and practical information on methods of preventing tail-biting, including those published by the European Commission, that producers should put into place with immediate effect;

Amendment 303 #

Petri SARVAMAA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Notes the ~~multifaceted complexity of the central, thorny~~central welfare problem in pig farming, namely tail biting~~; observes that the technical difficulty encountered in the extensive research into and analysis of risk factors throughout the EU has meant that no reliable solutions whatsoever have been found~~, which is still persistent in the majority of the Member States in spite of the substantial efforts of the European Commission and of the European Parliament to disseminate information and best practises on keeping pigs with intact tails; underlines the proven welfare conditions in Finland and Sweden, notably regarding space and feeding related practices as well as providing a solid floor;

Amendment 304 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Notes the multifaceted complexity of the central, thorny welfare problem in pig farming, namely tail biting; observes that the ~~technical difficulty encountered in the extensive research into and analysis of risk factors throughout the EU has meant that no reliable solutions whatsoever have been found~~re is a wealth of technical and practical information on methods of preventing tail-biting, including those published by the European Commission and notes that producers need to put that into place;

Amendment 305 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)

15a. Underlines that in the context of food safety, environment, climate action, animal welfare and equality between Member States, the Commission should ensure full enforcement of Directives, and urges the Commission that in the event of violations by the Member States she imposes strong sanctions, starting with the routine docking of piglet tails, which has no longer been allowed in the EU since 1991;

Amendment 306 #

Elsi KATAINEN, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI, Hilde VAUTMANS, Irène TOLLERET, Asger CHRISTENSEN, Emma WIESNER, Jérémy DECERLE, Martin HLAVÁČEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)

15a. Recalls that the full implementation of the current legislation in every Member State is crucial to enhance on-farm animal welfare and to ensure fair level playing field in the internal market;

Amendment 307 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)

15a. Urges the European Commission to initiate infringement proceedings against Member States that have failed to act to ensure the compliance with the ban on routine tail-docking in pigs;

Amendment 308 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 b (new)

15b. Calls for Council Directive 2008/120/EC laying down minimum standards for the protection of pigs to be revised to inter alia remove the 28 day exemption for confining sows in individual stalls and to ensure that the animals are kept in group housing throughout the entire gestation period and farrowing;

Amendment 309 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 c (new)

15c. Calls on the Commission to propose improved legislative requirements for pigs, specifically to end surgical castration, to increase minimum space requirements, incentivise the use of partially slatted floors, phase out individual stalls for pregnant sows and promote loose housing in farrowing pens;

Amendment 31 #

Aa. whereas Article 13 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union recognises that animals are sentient beings and stipulates that the Union and Member States shall pay full regard to their welfare requirements in formulating and implementing the Union's agriculture and fisheries policies;

Amendment 310 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. SRecognises the efforts made by the European pig farming sector to seek alternatives to piglet castration and stresses the need for amendments to the veterinary rules covering pig farms to take account of progress in the field of piglet castration;

Amendment 311 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Stresses the need for amendments to the veterinary rules covering pig farms to take account of progress in the field of alternatives to piglet castration;

Amendment 312 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Stresses the need for amendments to the veterinary rules covering pig farms to take account of progress in the field of alternatives to piglet castration;

Amendment 313 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Stresses the need for amendments to the veterinary rules covering pig farms to take account of progress in the field of alternative to piglet castration;

Amendment 314 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Invites the Commission to ~~ens~~favoure the ~~availability in the various Member States of a harmonised~~uptake of non-castration and immuno-castration methods and take all the legislative measures to phase out piglet castration by 2028; in the meanwhile invites the Commission to lay down a EU list of the available products and protocols for the use of ~~pain-killers~~analgesia and anaesthesia for piglet castration; until 2028, asks the Commission to ~~permit the short-term~~ insist on surgical castora~~ge of medicines on farms and to allow veterinarians to leave them there~~tion to be carried out by veterinarians only with an algesia and anaesthesia;

Amendment 315 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Invites the Commission to ~~ensure the availability in the various Member States of a harmonised~~favour the uptake of immuno-castration and take all the legislative measures to phase out piglet castration by 2028; in the meanwhile invites the Commission to lay down a EU list of the available products and protocols for the use of ~~pain-killers~~analgesia and anaesthesia for piglet castration; until 2028, asks the Commission to ~~permit the short-term~~ insist on surgical castora~~ge of medicines on farms and to allow veterinarians to leave them there~~tion to be carried out by veterinarians only with analgesia and anaesthesia;

Amendment 316 #

17. Invites the Commission to ensure the availability in the various Member States of a harmonised EU list of the available products and protocols for the use of pain-killers and anaesthesia for piglet castration; asks the Commission to permit the short-term storage of veterinary medicines on farms and to allow veterinarians to leave them there in accordance with strict regulatory framework provisions;

Amendment 317 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. ~~Invites the Commission to ensure the availability in the various Member States of~~Highlights the need to eliminate piglet castration without pain relief, and further to phase out piglet castration, as previously aimed for in the Brussels Declaration, by 2028; Invites the Commission, in the meantime, to lay down a harmonised EU list of the ~~available~~ products and protocols for the use of pain-killers and anaesthesia for piglet castration; ~~asks the Commission to permit the short-term storage of medicines on farms and to allow veterinarians to leave them there;~~

Amendment 318 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)

17a. Regrets that beak trimming is one of the symbols of intensification in livestock farming and is still routinely practiced for chicken, turkeys, laying hens and ducks across the EU; calls on the EU Commission to ban the practice of beak trimming in the EU and to improve housing systems that fulfil the needs of these animals; notes that dehorning and castration are common mutilations in cattle, sheep, and goat farming, and calls on the Commission to ensure that these and all other systemic mutilations will be forbidden by law;

Amendment 319 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)

17a. Regrets that beak trimming is one of the symbols of intensification in livestock farming and is still routinely practiced for chicken, turkeys, laying hens and ducks across the European Union; calls on the EU Commission to ban the practice of beak trimming in the EU and to improve housing systems that fulfil the needs of the animals; notes that dehorning and castration are common mutilations in cattle, sheep, and goat farming; calls on the Commission ensure that these mutilations will be forbidden by law;

Amendment 32 #

Jérémy DECERLE, Irène TOLLERET

Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)

Amendment 320 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)

17a. Notes that the production of foie gras is based on farming procedures that respect animal welfare criteria, since it is an extensive production, predominantly taking place on family farms, where birds spend 90% of their lives in open air, and where the fattening phase, which lasts between 10 and 12 days on average with 2 meals/day, respects the animals' biological parameters;

Amendment 321 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)

17a. Regrets that beak trimming is still routinely practiced for chickens, turkeys, laying hens and ducks across the European Union, despite various Member States' initiatives to regulate or prohibit the practice; calls on the Commission to ban the practice of beak trimming across the EU and to improve housing systems that fulfil the needs of the animals;

Amendment 322 #

17b. Stresses that intensive livestock farming, due to the high densities and concentration of animals, increases risk of higher disease rates among farm animals and results in an increase in the use of antimicrobials on farms;

Amendment 323 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 c (new)

17c. Calls for a transition from intensive environment towards sustainable farming systems, developed in the partnership with the farming community, with practices that are not dependent on the use of antimicrobials in animal husbandry;

Amendment 324 #

Carmen AVRAM, Attila ARA-KOVÁCS, Juozas OLEKAS, Paolo DE CASTRO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 d (new)

17d. Stresses the importance to stop supporting intensive farming practices with the aim to reduce the overall number of animals kept in the EU for agricultural purposes;

Amendment 325 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Applauds the Commission for publishing, on 12 May 2021, strategic guidelines for a more sustainable and competitive EU aquaculture, which pay particular attention to animal welfare, and welcomes the fact that Parliament’s Committee on Fisheries is drafting an own- initiative report on these guidelines; draws the attention to the limited synergy between 2014-2020 Common Fishery Policy and the farmed fish welfare; calls on the European Commission to put forward specific scientifically-sound provisions for farmed fish welfare;

Amendment 326 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Applauds the Commission for publishing, on 12 May 2021, strategic guidelines ~~for~~to promote a more sustainable and competitive EU aquaculture, ~~which~~replacing the dependency on European imports because development is insufficient for European aquaculture to meet the demand for fish products, and which also pay particular attention to ~~animal~~fish welfare,; and welcomes the fact that Parliament’s Committee on Fisheries is drafting an own- initiative report on these guidelines;

Amendment 327 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Applauds the Commission for publishing, on 12 May 2021, strategic guidelines for a more sustainable and competitive EU aquaculture, which pay particular attention to animal welfare, and welcomes the fact that Parliament’s Committee on Fisheries is drafting an own- initiative report on these guidelines which also address animal welfare; urges the Commission to deliver a legislative proposal establishing minimum welfare standards for farmed fish;

Amendment 328 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Applauds the Commission for publishing, on 12 May 2021, strategic guidelines for a more sustainable ~~and competitive~~ EU aquaculture, which pay particular attention to animal welfare, and welcomes the fact that Parliament’s Committee on Fisheries is drafting an own- initiative report on these guidelines, but at the same time emphasizes that there is still a need for EU legislation to secure the welfare of fish;

Amendment 329 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Invites the Commission to improve the internal market by devising a harmonised, shared strategy on animal welfare in European countries, while monitoring the proper implementation of and compliance with existing legislation throughout Member States;

Amendment 33 #

Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ, Christine SCHNEIDER, Daniel BUDA, Asim ADEMOV, Franc BOGOVIČ

Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)

Aa. whereas Article 13 of the TFEU considers animals as sentient beings, thus are capable of feeling pleasure and pain; therefore EU legislation must ensure that animals are kept in conditions that do not subject them to maltreatment, abuse, pain or suffering;

Amendment 330 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Invites the Commission to improve the internal market by ~~devising a harmonised, shared strategy on animal welfare in European countries~~including changes resulting from new European animal welfare legislation;

Amendment 331 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)

19a. Urges the introduction of comprehensive animal welfare legislation, with a harmonised implementation;

Amendment 332 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 b (new)

19b. Seeks reassurance that any harmonisation of the legislative framework will not lead to a decline in animal welfare standards or lowering of ambitions to improve animal welfare;

Amendment 333 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Urges the Commission to inform consumers and raise their awareness of the reality of livestock farming and the diversity and origin of production methods by showing, without dogmatism, the care and attention that farmers pay to their animals;deleted

Amendment 334 #

Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ, Simone SCHMIEDTBAUER, Christine SCHNEIDER, Daniel BUDA, Asim ADEMOV, Franc BOGOVIČ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Urges the Commission to inform consumers and raise their awareness of the reality of ~~livestock farming and the diversity and origin of production methods by showing, without dogmatism, the care and attention~~animal welfare problems associated with animal production farming and its real impact on the environment, loss of biodiversity and climate change, by introducing a mandatory EU method of production and origin label, covering all the stages of the life of the animal and including thate farm~~ers pay to their animal~~ing, transport, and slaughter methods, and by thus showing the diversity and origin of production methods and its implications;

Amendment 335 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

Amendment 336 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Urges the Commission to inform consumers and raise their awareness of the reality of livestock ~~farming and the diversity and origin of production methods by showing, without dogmatism, the care and attention that farmers pay to their animal~~animal production farming by including different tiers from minimum EU standards to premium standards on an EU-wide animal welfare related label and by showing the diversity and origin of production methods;

Amendment 337 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Urges the Commission to inform consumers, combat disinformation and raise their awareness of the reality of livestock farming and the diversity and origin of production methods by showing, without dogmatism or ideology, the care and attention that farmers pay to their animals;

Amendment 338 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Urges the Commission to inform consumers and raise their awareness of the reality of livestock farming and the diversity and origin of production methods by showing, without dogmatism or stigmatisation, the care and attention that farmers pay to their animals;

Amendment 339 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)

20a. Considers that sectors that have a major impact on environmental, climate and animal welfare issues should not be promoted by the EU and therefore calls on the Commission to cease funding promotion campaigns to support animal products;

Amendment 34 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)

Aa. whereas the European Union must ensure that all consumers have access to safe, high-quality, affordable food;

Amendment 340 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 b (new)

20b. Stresses the importance of high animal welfare standards, including during transport and slaughter, and underlines that a high level of animal welfare is essential for sustainable development and biodiversity conservation;

Amendment 341 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 c (new)

20c. Urges the Commission and the Member States to follow-up on the statement by the Netherlands, Germany and Luxembourg on the Council conclusions on animal welfare during maritime long distances transport to third countries and to support their call to set up an EU-wide ban of long-distance transports of livestock to third countries by road and by sea and to implement this in the upcoming revision of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2005;

Amendment 342 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Calls on the Commission to reword its regulatory framework to make it clearer, more predictable and more accessible, with a view not to tightening rules up or adding to them, but rather to making the objectives and indicators more easily comprehensible and, thereby, to leaving less room for interpretation and enabling and facilitating uniform national transposition among Member States; suggests updating the general directive to include the Commission’s objectives and expectations regarding the welfare of farm animals, systemic research findings and working on species-specific directives, with due account for the nature of livestock farming, the various stages of the animals’ lives, on- farm practices unrelated to livestock farming, the challenges facing stockbreeders, and the diversity of soil and weather conditions;

Amendment 343 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Calls on the Commission to reword its regulatory framework to make it clearer, with a view not to tightening rules up but rather to making the objectives and indicators more easily comprehensible and, thereby, to leaving less room for interpretation and enabling uniform national transposition among Member States; suggests updating the general directive to include the Commission’s objectives and expectations regarding the welfare of farm animals and working on species-specific directives, with due account for the nature of livestock farming, the various stages of the animals’ lives, on- farm practices unrelated to livestock farming, traditions and regional conditions, and the diversity of soil and weather conditions;

Amendment 344 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Calls on the Commission to reword its regulatory framework to ~~make it clearer, with a view not to tightening rules up but rather to maki~~improve the welfare of animals in the EU, make it clearer and comprehensive by setting up, among others, objectives and indicators more easily comprehensible and, thereby, to leav~~ing~~e less room for interpretation and enabling uniform national transposition among Member States; suggests updating the general directive ~~to include the Commission’s objectives and expectations regarding the welfare of farm animal~~in accordance with the latest scientific knowledge and the five domains and working on species-specific directives, with due account for the nature of livestock farming, the various stages of the animals’ lives from breeding to death, on- farm practices unrelated to livestock farming, and the diversity of soil and weather conditions;

Amendment 345 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Calls on the Commission to reword its regulatory framework to make it clearer, with a view ~~not to tightening rules up but rather~~ to making the objectives and indicators more easily comprehensible and, thereby, to leaving less room for interpretation and enabling uniform national transposition among Member States; suggests updating the general directive in accordance with the latest scientific knowledge, to include the Commission’s objectives and citizens' expectations regarding the welfare of farm animals and working on species-specific directives, with due account for the nature of livestock farming, the various stages of the animals’ lives, on- farm practices unrelated to livestock farming, and the diversity of soil and weather conditions;

Amendment 346 #

Carmen AVRAM, Attila ARA-KOVÁCS, Juozas OLEKAS, Paolo DE CASTRO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Calls on the Commission to reword its regulatory framework to ~~make it clearer, with a view not to tightening rules up but rather to maki~~improve the welfare of animals in the EU, make it clearer and comprehensive setting up, among others, objectives and indicators that are more easily comprehensible and, thereby, to leaving less room for interpretation and enabling uniform national transposition among Member States; suggests updating the gGeneral dDirective ~~to include the Commission’s objectives and expectations regarding the welfare of farm animals~~in accordance with the latest scientific knowledge and the five domains model and working on species-specific directives, with due account for the nature of livestock farming, the various stages of the animals’ lives~~, on- farm practices unrelated to livestock farming,~~ from breeding to death and the diversity of soil and weather conditions;

Amendment 347 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)

21a. Underlines that the rate of non- compliance with the animal welfare legislation is limited and has many limitation, amongst which unenforceable and unquantifiable animal-based indicators; notes that the frequency of inspections across Member States ranges from a minimum of 1% to a maximum of 30%; is concerned that this high variation of the frequency of inspections leads to either non-compliance with the Control Regulation, or to high pressure on farmers; calls therefore on the European Commission and on the Member States to standardise the implementation of the Control Regulation to reduce the variation of the frequency of inspections between Member States and livestock sectors;

Amendment 348 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)

21a. Recalls that mink farming can act as a reservoir for SARS-CoV-2 and future strains of the coronavirus and significantly compromises animal welfare and therefore strongly welcomes the initiative presented at the Agriculture and Fisheries Council meeting on 28 June 2021 by Austria and the Netherlands on the issue of fur farming in the EU, and notes that a number of Member States have expressed their support for the proposal; reiterates its call on the Commission to undertake appropriate action to prohibit fur farming in Europe due to animal welfare, ethical and public health concerns, and also urges the Commission to ban imports of fur from mink and raccoon dogs;

Amendment 349 #

Carmen AVRAM, Attila ARA-KOVÁCS, Juozas OLEKAS, Paolo DE CASTRO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)

21a. Recalls that mink farming can act as a reservoir for SARS-CoV-2 and future strains of the coronavirus and significantly compromises animal welfare; strongly welcomes the initiative presented at the Agriculture and Fisheries Council meeting on 28 June 2021 by Austria and the Netherlands on the issue of fur farming in the EU; notes that a number of Member States have expressed their support for the proposal; reiterates its call on the European Commission to undertake appropriate action to prohibit fur farming in Europe due to animal welfare, ethical and public health concerns;

Amendment 35 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)

Aa. whereas consumer's interest in the quality of food purchased is higher than ever;

Amendment 350 #

Jérémy DECERLE, Irène TOLLERET, Hilde VAUTMANS, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI, Alin MITUȚA, Martin HLAVÁČEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)

21a. Invites the Commission to take better notice of the specificities of rabbit farming;

Amendment 351 #

Carmen AVRAM, Attila ARA-KOVÁCS, Juozas OLEKAS, Paolo DE CASTRO, Eric ANDRIEU

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 b (new)

21b. Takes note of the lack of animal- based welfare indicators for the Council Directive 98/58/EC (general directive), as well as for the Council Directive 2008/120/EC (pigs), the Council Directive 2007/43/ EC (broilers) and the Council Directive 1999/74/EC (laying hens); acknowledges as well the lack of quantifiable requirements for the implementation and monitoring of environmental conditions such as air quality (nitrogen, CO2, dust), lighting (duration, brightness) and minimal noise, which not only affects the animal welfare, but also distorts competition because of the margins of interpretations; calls for the European Commission to set up enforceable and quantifiable such indicators, which should be species- specific and up to date from a scientific point of view;

Amendment 352 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. ~~Invit~~Urges the Commission to clarify its framework for monitoring Member States ~~and punishing them for any non- compliance~~, starting infringement procedures and punishing them for any non-compliance; invites the Commission to put forward an effective monitoring and sanction system, to ensure that detrimental practices will be tackled, and responsible parties made legally accountable for any cruelty on animals;

Amendment 353 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. ~~Invit~~Urges the Commission to clarify its framework for monitoring Member States and punishing them for any non- compliance, and invites the Commission to put forward an effective monitoring and sanction system, to ensure that detrimental practices will be tackled, and responsible parties made legally accountable for any cruelty and suffering inflicted on animals;

Amendment 354 #

Carmen AVRAM, Attila ARA-KOVÁCS, Juozas OLEKAS, Paolo DE CASTRO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. ~~Invit~~Urges the Commission to ~~clarify its~~develop an effective framework for monitoring of and in Member States ~~and punishing them for any~~to ensure that detrimental practices are tackled and to begin infringement proceedings for non- compliances;

Amendment 355 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)

22a. Emphasises the importance of precision livestock farming technologies, including the potential of on-farm animal health and welfare monitoring tools, which help to prevent and better control disease outbreaks on farms;

Amendment 356 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)

22a. Urges the Commission to start infringement procedures against systemically non-compliant Member States in the implementation and enforcement of existing animal welfare legislation;

Amendment 357 #

Carmen AVRAM, Attila ARA-KOVÁCS, Juozas OLEKAS, Paolo DE CASTRO, Eric ANDRIEU

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 b (new)

22b. Calls for improved management of veterinary prevention and promotion of high animal health and welfare standards, notably on vaccination and preventing the unnecessary use of antimicrobials, to prevent the spread of zoonotic diseases;

Amendment 358 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

23. Asks the Commission to accompany any decision with a scientific and economic impact assessment (including a market study) taking into account the diversity of farming methods in each sector in the European Union and analysing the situation from both the animal’s (species by species and at different stages of production) and the farmer’s perspective; notes that the improvement of animal welfare should be the primary consideration for legislative proposals to update and expand the body of EU animal welfare legislation;

Amendment 359 #

23. Asks the Commission to accompany any decision with a scientific and a socio-economic impact assessment (including a market study) taking into account the diversity of farming methods in each sector in the European Union and analysing the situation from both the animal’s (species by species and at different stages of production) and the farmer’s perspective, and always considering citizens’ expectations;

Amendment 36 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A b (new)

Ab. whereas animals should no longer be modified or mutilated to be adapted to the system, but the system should be adapted to the animals’ needs and behaviour instead, meaning that it should not be allowed to hurt an animal, cause injury to an animal or harm the health or welfare of the animal with the aim of housing the animal in a certain way;

Amendment 360 #

Mara BIZZOTTO, Gilles LEBRETON, Angelo CIOCCA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

23. Asks the Commission ~~to accompany any decision with~~when carrying out a scientific ~~and~~, economic and sustainable impact assessment (including a market study) t~~aking~~o take into account the diversity of farming methods in each sector in the European Union and analysing the situation from bothe farmer’s perspective, but especially the animal’s perspective (species by species and at different stages of production) ~~and the farmer’s perspective~~;

Amendment 361 #

Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ, Simone SCHMIEDTBAUER, Christine SCHNEIDER, Daniel BUDA, Asim ADEMOV, Michal WIEZIK, Franc BOGOVIČ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

23. Asks the Commission to accompany any decision with a ~~scientific and economic~~ impact assessment (including ~~a market study~~environmental, economic and social impact) taking into account the diversity of farming methods in each sector in the European Union and analysing the situation from both the animal’s (species by species and at different stages of production) and the farmer’s perspective;

Amendment 362 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)

23a. Calls in this regard on the Commission to take into account the specificity of animal welfare, including the breeding of horses for sport;

Amendment 363 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

24. Calls on the Commission to improve cooperation between all the stakeholders concerned and to facilitate dialogue between the various stakeholders in the Member States so as to enable joint consideration of developments in livestock-farming systems; encourages the sharing of ‘good’ practices between livestock-farming sectors and countries; wishes to see the development of tools to encourage pioneering livestock farmers to participate in development projects; asks for livestock farmers to be involved at all stages of the studies carried out in Europe’s various regions; wishes to see the study documents and documents for disseminating good practice translated into all the languages of the European Union; recognises the potential of the Horizon Europe programme for research and innovation, and expects a geographical balance between Member States in terms of access to finance for the projects;

Amendment 364 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

24. Calls on the Commission to improve cooperation between all the stakeholders concerned and to facilitate dialogue between the various stakeholders in the Member States so as to enable joint consideration of developments in ~~livestock-~~ animal production-farming systems; encourages the sharing of ‘good’ practices between ~~livestock-~~ animal production-farming sectors and countries; wishes to see the development of tools to encourage pioneering ~~livestock~~animal production farmers to participate in development projects; asks for ~~livestock~~NGOs, animal welfare scientists and animal production farmers to be involved at all stages of the studies carried out in Europe’s various regions; wishes to see the study documents and documents for disseminating good practice translated into all the languages of the European Union;

Amendment 365 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

24. Calls on the Commission to improve cooperation between all the stakeholders concerned and to facilitate dialogue between the various stakeholders in the Member States so as to enable joint consideration of developments in ~~livestock-~~ animal production-farming systems; encourages the sharing of ‘good’ practices between ~~livestock- farming sectors~~animal production-farming and countries; wishes to see the development of tools to encourage pioneering ~~livestock~~animal production farmers to participate in development projects; asks for ~~livestock~~NGOs, animal welfare scientists and animal production farmers to be involved at all stages of the studies carried out in Europe’s various regions; wishes to see the study documents and documents for disseminating good practice translated into all the languages of the European Union;

Amendment 366 #

Carmen AVRAM, Attila ARA-KOVÁCS, Juozas OLEKAS, Paolo DE CASTRO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

24. Calls on the Commission to improve cooperation between all the stakeholders concerned and to facilitate dialogue between the various stakeholders in the Member States so as to enable joint consideration of developments in livestock-farming systems; encourages the sharing of ‘good’ practices between livestock-farming sectors and countries; wishes to see the development of tools to encourage pioneering livestock farmers to participate in development projects; asks for livestock farmers and animal welfare scientists to be involved at all stages of the studies carried out in Europe’s various regions; wishes to see the study documents and documents for disseminating good practice translated into all the languages of the European Union;

Amendment 367 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)

24a. Emphasis the lack of coherence between trade policy and animal welfare policy, which led to an unfair competitive environment for EU producers; calls for reciprocity in bilateral and multilateral trade agreements;

Amendment 368 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. Urges the Commission to link its various strategies by implementing rules drawn up in a manner consistent with the European Green Deal, the ‘Farm to Fork’ strategy and agricultural, trade and promotion policies; and recommends, in particular, holistic assessment of the impact of all of the Green Deal strategies on the economic stability of EU farms in individual Member States;

Amendment 369 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. Urges the Commission to link its various strategies by implementing rules drawn up in a manner consistent with the European Green Deal, the ‘Farm to Fork’ strategy and policies relating to agriculturale, trade ~~and promotion policies~~, unfair commercial practices and promotion; stresses that coherence between these strategies is a precondition for a viable agricultural sector;

Amendment 37 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas European food-production standards, including animal welfare criteria, are the highest and most rigorous in the world; whereas, under the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Member States have undertaken to comply with all welfare requirements of animals as sentient beings, while respecting customs relating to religious rituals, cultural traditions and regional heritage in the Member States;

Amendment 370 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. Urges the Commission to link its various strategies by implementing rules drawn up in a manner consistent with the European Green Deal, the ‘Farm to Fork’ strategy, the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030, and agricultural, trade and promotion policies;

Amendment 371 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)

25a. Urges the Commission to ensure that the EU continuously raises animal welfare awareness with its trade partners, through bilateral cooperation and binding requirements in bilateral trade agreements, and through work with international organisations such as OIE and FAO; calls on the Commission to promote a level-playing field for farmers, by applying equal standards to domestic and imported products, based on the need to protect the environment and to respond to ethical concerns, as permitted by WTO rules and in particular Article XX of the GATT;

Amendment 372 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)

25a. Calls on the Commission to make ensuring a level playing field as regards compliance with animal welfare and environmental protection standards by EU and third-country entities top priority when negotiating and concluding Free Trade Agreements, to protect EU agricultural markets from unfair competition from outside and dumping;

Amendment 373 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)

25a. Stresses that the Farm to Fork Strategy recognises the urgent need to improve animal welfare and broaden its scope, highlighting the benefits it brings for animals, food quality, reduction of the need for medication and preservation of biodiversity, and following the latest scientific advice;

Amendment 374 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)

25a. Regrets the fact that, as recognised by the Commission, under existing EU legislation, only a few animal species and products are subject to specific animal welfare requirements on import;

Amendment 375 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)

25a. Calls on the Commission to bring geopolitical and trade policy into line with European Union standards in order to create a level playing field and avoid undermining the economic profitability of its own producers;

Amendment 376 #

Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ, Simone SCHMIEDTBAUER, Christine SCHNEIDER, Daniel BUDA, Asim ADEMOV, Michal WIEZIK, Franc BOGOVIČ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)

25a. Calls on the Commission to re- evaluate trade agreements with third countries in order to ensure that they meet the same animal welfare and product quality standards;

Amendment 377 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 b (new)

25b. Underlines that it is essential for the EU to take into account third country compliance with animal welfare standards, and emphasizes that all animal products imported into the EU should be produced in full compliance with EU legislation, including the relevant animal welfare legislation;

Amendment 378 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

~~26. Calls on the Commission to join up the various legal texts on animal welfare, whether on farms, during transport or at slaughter;~~deleted

Amendment 379 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

~~26. Calls on the Commission to join up the various legal texts on animal welfare, whether on farms, during transport or at slaughter;~~deleted

Amendment 38 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas European food-production standards, including animal welfare criteria, are the highest and most rigorous in the world, and whereas external trade agreements concluded by the EU must ensure that our agricultural markets are sufficiently protected against unfair competition and price dumping on the part of third countries;

Amendment 380 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)

26a. Recalls that mink farming can act as a reservoir for SARS-CoV-2 and future strains of the coronavirus and significantly compromises animal welfare; Strongly welcomes the initiative presented at the Agriculture and Fisheries Council meeting of 28 June 2021 and supported by several Member States, on the issue of ending fur farming in the EU; supports their call on the European Commission to undertake appropriate action to prohibit fur farming in Europe due to animal welfare, ethical and public health concerns;

Amendment 381 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)

26a. Is of the opinion that animals should no longer be slaughtered in the EU according to methods that cause additional distress, such as the electrical water bath method stunning of poultry and CO2 stunning of pigs, and urges the Member States to ensure that all animals slaughtered in the EU are stunned prior to slaughter, without any exceptions, as confirmed by the European Court of Justice ruling C-336/19 of 17 December 2020 that Member States have the right to introduce mandatory pre-slaughter stunning;

Amendment 382 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 b (new)

26b. Calls the Commission to adopt an EU wide ban on any traditional or cultural use of animals that implies mistreatment and suffering;

Amendment 383 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 c (new)

26c. Underlines the importance of heat plans to protect animals during heat waves, and urges the Member States to develop adequate and effective heat plans, by taking into account keeping fewer animals in stables by setting up breeding restrictions before the start of the summer, the implementation of measures to prevent the occurrence of heat stress in animals, lowering the slaughtering speed in slaughterhouses in order to limit the amount of animals arriving at the slaughterhouse at the same time, setting up maximum waiting times at slaughterhouses, mandatory ventilation in all vehicles used to transport animals and performing additional, adequate controls during heat waves;

Amendment 384 #

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 3

Animal Welfare Labelling

Amendment 385 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27

27. ~~Deplor~~Notes the lack of a return on investment for farmers who take part in voluntary animal welfare recognition schemes; ~~notes, further~~therefore, calls on the European Commission to put forward a European, tha~~t animal welfare labelling will only prove successful if a return on investment is forthcoming from the higher price point~~rmonised and mandatory method-of- production and origin labelling system, that provides information about the farming, transport, and slaughter methods as well as information on the welfare of the animals involved, covering all the stages of the life of the animal;

Amendment 386 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27

27. ~~Deplor~~Notes the lack of a return on investment for farmers who take part in voluntary animal welfare recognition schemes; ~~notes, further~~therefore, calls on the European Commission to put forward a European, tha~~t animal welfare labelling will only prove successful if a return on investment is forthcoming from the higher price point~~rmonised and mandatory method of production labelling system, that provides information about the farming, transport, and slaughter methods as well as information on the welfare of the animals involved, from minimum EU animal welfare standard to premium levels;

Amendment 387 #

Carmen AVRAM, Juozas OLEKAS, Paolo DE CASTRO, Eric ANDRIEU

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27

27. Deplores the lack of a return on investment for farmers who take part in voluntary animal welfare recognition schemes; notes, further, that animal welfare labelling will only prove successful if a return on investment is forthcoming from the higher price point and only if farmers are guaranteed a fair share of the higher price paid by the consumer for the purchase of food products complying with EU animal welfare labelling requirements;

Amendment 388 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27

27. Deplores the lack of a return on investment for farmers who take part in voluntary animal welfare recognition schemes; notes, further, that animal welfare labelling will only prove successful if a return on investment is forthcoming from the higher price point and if costs and benefits are fairly distributed throughout the entire agri-food chain;

Amendment 389 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27

27. Deplores the limited return on investment for farmers who take part in voluntary animal welfare recognition schemes; Deplores the lack of a return on investment for farmers who take part in voluntary animal welfare recognition schemes; notes, further, that animal welfare labelling will only prove successful if a return on investment is forthcoming from the higher price point;

Amendment 39 #

Mara BIZZOTTO, Gilles LEBRETON, Angelo CIOCCA

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas European food-production standards, including animal welfare criteria, ~~are the high~~have to be improved, and notices that several countriest and ~~most rigorous in the world~~regions took further steps, for instance by banning certain forms of caged farming and banning live export and the transport of specific animal categories;

Amendment 390 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 a (new)

27a. Calls on the Commission to negotiate reciprocity clauses at multilateral level and in bilateral agreements regarding compliance with animal welfare standards for imported products, including for the purpose of providing accurate information to consumers;

Amendment 391 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 a (new)

27a. Notes there is little information available on the impact of the labelling systems studied on food businesses as well as on consumers' confidence and understanding of animal welfare practices;

Amendment 392 #

Christine SCHNEIDER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28

28. Stresses that the introduction of animal welfare labelling requires, at an early stage, harmonised rules drawn up in collaboration with farmers and based on clear scientific indicators; calls for consideration to be given to an EU framework for voluntary labelling covering all livestock farms, so as to limit the risks of distorting competition in the internal market while leaving sufficient room for private initiatives; and at the same time calls for our standards of animal protection and welfare to also be complied with in the case of imports from outside the EU in order to guarantee the competitiveness of European producers;

Amendment 393 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28

28. Stresses that the introduction of animal welfare labelling requires, at an early stage, harmonised rules drawn up in collaboration with farmers and based on clear scientific indicators and large scale promotion campaigns, alongside with education and marketing actions targeting European consumers; calls for consideration to be given to an EU framework for voluntary labelling covering all livestock farms, so as to limit the risks of distorting competition in the internal market while leaving sufficient room for private initiatives;

Amendment 394 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28

28. Stresses that the introduction of animal welfare labelling requires, at an early stage, harmonised rules drawn up in collaboration with farmers and based on clear scientific indicators; calls for consideration to be given to an EU framework for voluntary labelling covering all livestock farms, but including and recognising specific features for each species, so as to limit the risks of distorting competition in the internal market while leaving sufficient room for private initiatives;

Amendment 395 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28

28. Stresses that the introduction of animal welfare labelling requires, at an early stage, harmonised rules drawn up in collaboration with ~~farmers~~all relevant actors along the food chain (including farmers, NGOs, consumer organisations and farmers) and based on clear scientific indicators; calls for consideration to be given to an EU framework for ~~volunta~~mandatory labelling covering all ~~livestock farm~~animal production species, so as to limit the risks of distorting competition in the internal market ~~while leaving sufficient room for private initiatives~~;

Amendment 396 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28

28. Stresses that the introduction of animal welfare labelling requires, at an early stage, harmonised rules drawn up in collaboration with ~~farmers~~all relevant actors along the food chain (including farmers, NGOs and consumer organisations) and based on clear scientific indicators; calls for consideration to be given to an EU framework for ~~volunta~~mandatory labelling covering all ~~livestock farm~~farmed animal species, so as to limit the risks of distorting competition in the internal market ~~while leaving sufficient room for private initiatives~~;

Amendment 397 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28

28. Stresses that the introduction of animal welfare labelling requires, at an early stage, harmonised rules drawn up in collaboration with ~~farm~~all stakeholders and based on clear scientific indicators; calls for consideration to be given to an EU ~~framework for volunta~~mandatory labelling covering all livestock farms, so as to limit the risks of distorting competition in the internal market ~~while leaving sufficient room for private initiatives~~;

Amendment 398 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28 a (new)

28a. Calls on the Commission also to guarantee animal welfare in the rest of the chain downstream of the producer and to incorporate it in the harmonised voluntary labelling provisions;

Amendment 399 #

Carmen AVRAM, Attila ARA-KOVÁCS, Juozas OLEKAS, Paolo DE CASTRO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29

29. Asks the Commission to propose a~~n EU framework for voluntary~~ harmonised mandatory European animal welfare labelling which is linked to EU rules – which must be its basis – and which invites the Member States to record the various approaches used; calls for its specifications to be drawn up according to a technically realistic approach and for this EU framework to ensure that value is redistributed towards livestock farmers, shows the method of production and additionally reflects the entire life cycle of the animals (including breeding, fattening, transport, slaughter); calls for its specifications to be drawn up according to a technically realistic approach, distinguishing different tiers ranging from minimum standards to premium level, and for this label to ensure that value is redistributed towards livestock farmers, to enable market-driven progress in animal welfare; Insists that the labelling scheme must be based on a clear set of technical references, with a protected use of the terms and claims made in marketing, to prevent misinformation of consumers and animal welfare-washing; recalls that, for consistency, processed products and ingredients of animal origin should also be labelled;

Amendment 4 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 7 a (new)

— having regard to the European Commission's Study to support the evaluation of the European Union Strategy for the Protection and Welfare of Animals 2012-2015,

Amendment 40 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas some of the European food-production standards, including animal welfare criteria, are among the highest and most rigorous in the world;

Amendment 400 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29

29. Asks the Commission to propose an EU framework for ~~volunta~~mandatory animal welfare labelling ~~which is linked to EU rules – which must be its basis – and which invites the Member States to record the various approaches used; calls for its~~based on specifications to be drawn up according to a technically realistic approach and for this EU framework to ensure that value is redistributed towards ~~livestock~~animal production farmers;

Amendment 401 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29

29. Asks the Commission to propose an EU framework for ~~volunta~~mandatory animal welfare labelling ~~which is link~~based ton EU rules ~~– which must be its basis – and which invites the Member States to record the various approaches used~~; calls for its specifications to be drawn up according to a technically realistic approach and for this EU framework to ensure that value is redistributed towards livestock animal production farmers;

Amendment 402 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29

29. Asks the Commission to propose an EU framework for voluntary animal welfare labelling which is linked to EU rules – which must be its basis – and which invites the Member States to record the various approaches used; calls for its specifications to be drawn up according to a technically realistic and scientifically- sound approach and for this EU framework to ensure that value is redistributed towards livestock farmers;

Amendment 403 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 a (new)

29a. Recommends that the proposed animal welfare labelling scheme take into account the increased informational demands of consumers and the concurrent objectives of Farm to Fork as concerns sustainability, health and dietary concerns, alongside animal welfare; Notes that an animal welfare labelling system that includes the transporting distance has potential to incentivize consumers to buy products that are more local, in line with the Farm to Fork objectives;

Amendment 404 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30

30. Invites the Commission to conduct an in-depth examination of the possible implications of introducing mandatory labelling requirements at EU level, ~~drawing in particular on experience gained in recent public labelling schemes in some Member States~~thoroughly assessing the impact on all the actors involved in the food supply chain, from farmers to consumers, drawing in particular on experience gained in recent public labelling schemes in some Member States; calls on the European Commission to avoid conflicts between possible future schemes with existing labelling frameworks, especially with those envisaged by the mandatory requirements in the animal welfare specific directives; is concerned about the results of a previous impact assessment conducted by the European Commission, in 2012, indicating that labelling would increase industry costs without necessarily increasing the benefits as well;

Amendment 405 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30

30. Invites the Commission to conduct an in-depth examination of ~~the possible implications of~~ introducing mandatory labelling requirements at EU level, drawing in particular on experience gained in recent public labelling schemes in some Member States, and underlines that such a method-of-production and origin label should be species-specific, cover all the stages of the life of the animal, including farming, transport, and slaughter methods and should be applied to all animal products, in order to increase transparency, empower consumers and create a level-playing field;

Amendment 406 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30

30. Invites the Commission to conduct an in-depth examination of the possible implications of introducing mandatory labelling requirements at EU level, drawing in particular on experience gained in recent public labelling schemes in some Member States; calls on the Commission to attach high importance to market opportunities and associated returns for producers and a fair distribution of costs and benefits throughout the chain;

Amendment 407 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30

30. Invites the Commission to conduct an in-depth examination of the possible implications, especially for stockbreeders, of introducing mandatory labelling requirements at EU level, drawing in particular on experience gained in recent public labelling schemes in some Member States;

Amendment 408 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 a (new)

30a. Notes that mandatory labelling legislation could be discouraging for private undertakings that invest in product diversity and observe higher animal welfare standards as market leverage;

Amendment 409 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 a (new)

30a. Calls on the Commission to implement a policy to protect European livestock farming by prohibiting the import into Europe of livestock or meat not complying with European animal welfare standards;

Amendment 41 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas European food-production standards, including animal welfare criteria, are among the highest ~~and most rigorous in the world~~in the world, yet still need improvement;

Amendment 410 #

Christine SCHNEIDER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 a (new)

30a. Calls on the Commission to significantly improve public awareness and understanding of animal welfare in food production through education in schools and advertising campaigns;

Amendment 411 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 a (new)

30a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to annually report to the Parliament on their actions to improve the welfare of animals kept on farms in the EU;

Amendment 412 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31

31. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission and to the parliaments of the Member States.

Amendment 42 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)

Ba. whereas the implementation of EU animal welfare legislation is facing numerous problems, including a lack of compliance, not harmonised standards and the absence of legal milestones;

Amendment 43 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)

Bb. whereas there is an overall lack of effective implementation and enforcement of current EU legislation related to the welfare of animals;

Amendment 44 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas ~~more uniform application of~~updating existing animal welfare legislation is ~~a prerequisite to raisi~~much needed, as well as the need for development, implementation and enforcement of streng the~~se standards~~ned and new, species-specific animal welfare legislation;

Amendment 45 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas ~~more~~ uniform application of ~~existing~~ animal welfare legislation and updating according to latest scientific knowledge is a prerequisite to raising these standards;

Amendment 46 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas more uniform ~~application~~ wording of existing animal welfare legislation is a prerequisite to raising these standards and universal compliance with these standards;

Amendment 47 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas ~~more uniform applic~~an updationg of existing animal welfare legislation is a prerequisite to raising these standards;

Amendment 48 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)

Ca. whereas ongoing and specific animal welfare problems, not only related to livestock production in the farming sector, but also in other sectors, such as those concerning companion animals, equines, wild animals and other animals kept or traded in the context of an economic activity, should be solved at EU level;

Amendment 49 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas European farmers have made steady progress in recent decades by looking critically at their practices and making improvements and adjustments in their work; whereas they rely on the support of advisory and research bodies and a number of non-governmental organisations to improve their practices; whereas, what is more, European farmers want to continue to move forward in this area but face technical and economic obstacles; whereas the improvement of animal welfare must take into account the health-related aspects particular to each species, and whereas the cost should not be borne by producers alone;

Amendment 5 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 7 a (new)

— having regard to its resolution of 14 March 2017 on minimum standards for the protection of farm rabbits (2016/2077(INI)),

Amendment 50 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas despite European farmers haveing made s~~teady~~ome progress in recent decades by looking critically at their practices and making improvements and adjustments in their work; whereas they rely on the support of advisory and research bodies and a number of non-governmental organisations to improve their practices; whereas, what is more, European farmers want toon farm animal welfare, the maltreatment and suffering of farmed animals in the EU has continued during these decades and even multiplied, because ever-increasing numbers of animals have been bred and contfin~~ue to move forward in this area but face technical and economic obstacle~~ed in factory farms;

Amendment 51 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

Amendment 52 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas some European farmers have made steady progress in recent decades by looking critically at their practices and making improvements and adjustments in their work; whereas they rely on the support of advisory and research bodies and a number of non- governmental organisations to improve their practices; whereas, what is more, European farmers want to continue to move forward in this area but face technical and economic obstacles;

Amendment 53 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas European farmers have made s~~teady~~ome progress in recent decades by looking critically at their practices and making improvements and adjustments in their work; whereas they rely on the support of advisory and research bodies and a number of non-governmental organisations to improve their practices; whereas, what is more, European farmers want to continue to move forward in this area but face technical and economic obstacles;

Amendment 54 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)

Da. whereas industrial livestock farming plays a prominent role in EU agriculture, and in just over a decade several million farms have ceased to exist, representing over a third of all farms in Europe, of which the vast majority were small family businesses, due to upscaling and intensification of the agricultural system;

Amendment 55 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)

Da. whereas economic volatility is forcing stockbreeders to factor in lengthy periods of amortisation and investment, for example in livestock accommodation designed to enhance animal welfare;

Amendment 56 #

Jérémy DECERLE, Irène TOLLERET, Hilde VAUTMANS, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI, Alin MITUȚA, Elsi KATAINEN

Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)

Da. whereas European farmers are currently undertaking further action regarding the evolution of breeding and animal housing, with a view to strengthen the convergence with the OIE's 'Five Freedoms';

Amendment 57 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D b (new)

Db. whereas despite significant developments in animal welfare science have taken place since the existing EU farm animal welfare legislation was adopted, it is vital to revise and augment the existing body of animal welfare legislation to bring it into line with the latest scientific advancements and to respond to societal demands for improvement of the welfare of animals and the elimination of outdated livestock housing systems and other production practices that negatively impact their welfare;

Amendment 58 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

~~E. whereas animal welfare goes hand in hand with farmers’ welfare and both should be given appropriate resources;~~deleted

Amendment 59 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas animal welfare goes hand in hand with farmers’ welfare and both should be given appropriate resources and greater practical support at European level;

Amendment 6 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 7 b (new)

— having regard to its resolution of 25 October 2018 on animal welfare, antimicrobial use and the environmental impact of industrial broiler farming (2018/2858(RSP)),

Amendment 60 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas animal welfare goes hand in hand with farmers’ and farm operators' welfare and both should be given appropriate resources;

Amendment 61 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas animal welfare goes hand in hand with farm~~ers’ welfare~~ operators’ well-being and both should be given appropriate resources;

Amendment 62 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)

Ea. whereas the Covid-19 pandemic has highlighted the direct link between animal and human health and wellbeing and was most likely the result of dysfunctional interaction with animals; whereas animal welfare is also linked to the environment, as best explored through the One Welfare framework;

Amendment 63 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)

Ea. whereas the agricultural subsidies to promote agricultural products inside and outside the EU drastically increased the past years, namely to 142,5 million euros in 2017, 188.5 million euros in 2018 and 200 million euros in 2020;

Amendment 64 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)

Ea. whereas the COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the direct link between animal and human health and wellbeing; whereas animal welfare is also linked to the environment, as best explored through the One Welfare framework;

Amendment 65 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)

Ea. whereas the European livestock farms employ around 4 million people (salaried and non-salaried), 80% of whom reside in the more recent EU Member States1a; _________________ 1ahttps://op.europa.eu/en/publication- detail/-/publication/04af47b0-0c38-11eb- bc07-01aa75ed71a1/language-en

Amendment 66 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E b (new)

Eb. whereas EU fish intra-trade plays an essential role in the whole EU fishery trade and it accounted in 2014 for 86% of total trade within and outside the EU, volumes sold within the EU reaching at 5,74 million tonnes with a value of EUR 20,6 billion, the highest registered since 20063a; _________________ 3a https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/201 6/february/tradoc_154321.pdf

Amendment 67 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E b (new)

Eb. whereas the Covid-19 pandemic has highlighted the direct link between animal and human health and wellbeing and the consequences of dysfunctional interaction with animals;

Amendment 68 #

Carmen AVRAM, Attila ARA-KOVÁCS, Juozas OLEKAS, Paolo DE CASTRO

Motion for a resolution
Recital E b (new)

Eb. whereas currently the animal welfare law lacks species- and age- specific provisions that cover all production cycle stages;

Amendment 69 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E c (new)

Ec. whereas animal health and welfare are key to enabling food safety and security, public health and contributing to high quality standards in the EU;

Amendment 7 #

Carmen AVRAM, Attila ARA-KOVÁCS, Juozas OLEKAS, Paolo DE CASTRO

Motion for a resolution
Citation 7 b (new)

— having regard to the Council's conclusions on animal welfare - an integral part of sustainable animal production, adopted on 16th of December, 2019,

Amendment 70 #

Carmen AVRAM, Attila ARA-KOVÁCS, Juozas OLEKAS, Paolo DE CASTRO

Motion for a resolution
Recital E d (new)

Ed. whereas healthy livestock is a key component of achieving sustainable, lower-carbon farming;

Amendment 71 #

Carmen AVRAM, Attila ARA-KOVÁCS, Juozas OLEKAS, Paolo DE CASTRO

Motion for a resolution
Recital E e (new)

Ee. whereas animal health and welfare are essential elements of any sustainable food system and impacts on animal health and welfare have direct effect on the sustainability of the food system;

Amendment 72 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital F

F. whereas scientific and technical developments have improved our understanding of animal sentience and welfare; and should lead to suitable and better legislation to protect all animals kept in the EU;

Amendment 73 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital F

F. whereas scientific and technical developments have improved our understanding of animal sentience, behaviour and welfare;

Amendment 74 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)

Fa. whereas European citizens have a strong interest in the welfare of animals and want to be able to make more informed choices as consumers;

Amendment 75 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital G

G. whereas significant difficulties were encountered in the collection of data on the implementation of on-farm animal welfare legislation as regards both the quality and the availability of data, due to lack of monitoring and data collection requirements on Member States;

Amendment 76 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital H

H. whereas the current legislation is partly obsolete and lags behind the knowledge on the specific needs of animals according to their species, age, size and physical condition, and the scientific advances and technical progress made in farming practices;

Amendment 77 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital H

H. whereas the current legislation is partly obsolete and lags behind the scientific advances and technical progress made in farming practices, and implementation of the legislation is highly inconsistent across Member States;

Amendment 78 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital H

H. whereas the current legislation is partly obsolete and lags behind the scientific advances and technical progress made in farming practices, as well as citizens’ demands regarding animal welfare;

Amendment 79 #

Carmen AVRAM, Attila ARA-KOVÁCS, Juozas OLEKAS, Paolo DE CASTRO

Motion for a resolution
Recital H a (new)

Ha. whereas animal welfare should be further improved on the basis of prevailing scientific findings;

Amendment 8 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 7 c (new)

— having regard to the Council's conclusions on an EU wide animal welfare label, adopted on 7th of December, 2020,

Amendment 80 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital I

I. whereas the current EU legislation, which provides a combination of opt-outs, exceptions and unclear requirements and fails to provide specific safeguards or guarantee levels of protection, thereby giving rise to a number of undesirable practices, co- exists with national laws, resulting in legislative fragmentation and legal uncertainty on the domestic market, all of which are considered to have distorted competition;

Amendment 81 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital I

I. whereas the current EU legislation, which provides a combination of opt-outs, exceptions and unclear requirements and fails to provide specific safeguards, co- exists with national laws~~, all of which are considered to have distorted competition~~;

Amendment 82 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital I

Amendment 83 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital J

J. whereas animal welfare legislation does not cover all species farmed for ~~food~~the production of food, as there is still no species-specific legislation for dairy and beef cattle beyond six months old, sheep and goats, the parent birds of broiler chickens and laying hens, pullets, turkeys, ducks and geese, quail, fish and rabbits;

Amendment 84 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital J

J. whereas EU animal welfare legislation ~~does not cover all~~establishes species-specific minimum welfare standards only for pigs, laying hens, broilers and calves, while there is no species-specific legislation for other species farmed for food, including fish;

Amendment 85 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital J a (new)

Ja. whereas currently animal welfare legislation lacks species-and age-specific provisions that cover all production cycle stages;

Amendment 86 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital J b (new)

Jb. whereas hundreds of millions of terrestrial farmed animals and billions of farmed fish belonging to different species are currently only protected by the general provisions of Directive 98/58/EC;

Amendment 87 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital J c (new)

Jc. whereas it has been found that the General Directive has generally been less impactful than the species-specific Directives, due to the vague nature of the requirements and the large margins of interpretation it has allowed and the absence of species-specific protections for dairy cows, broiler and hen breeders, rabbits, sheep and turkeys;

Amendment 88 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital J d (new)

Jd. whereas rabbits are the second most farmed species in the EU in terms of numbers of animals, with a majority of them reared in cages with inadequate welfare standards;

Amendment 89 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital J e (new)

Je. whereas male goat kids that are born in the dairy goat industry are and almost always separated from their mothers immediately after birth, and already transported and slaughtered three days after birth, and alarmingly high numbers of male goat kids and surplus goat lambs become seriously ill and die after being taken away from their mothers;

Amendment 9 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 8

— having regard to the study requested by European Parliament’s PETI Committee ‘End the cage age: Looking for alternatives’ of November 2020, its resolution of 10 June 2021 on the European Citizens’ Initiative ‘End the Cage Age’ (2021/2633 (RSP)) and the Commission Communication - C(2021)4747 of 30 June 2021,

Amendment 90 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital J f (new)

Jf. whereas there are several structural and serious welfare problems in duck farming, including the lack of open bathing water, which prevents ducks from displaying their species-specific behaviour, and furthermore, ducks suffer from joint inflammation and bone abnormalities because their body is not suitable for standing all day, which is still being aggravated by the fact that duck farming is aimed at developing a lot of breast meat;

Amendment 91 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital K

~~K. whereas initiatives other than EU legislation and official checks have played a part in the continuous improvement of farming practices;~~deleted

Amendment 92 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital K

K. whereas initiatives other than EU legislation and official checks have played a part in the ~~continuous~~ improvement of farming practices; whereas many member states have implemented own initiative animal welfare standards that are more stringent than those of the EU;

Amendment 93 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital L

L. whereas the Member States have been given considerable discretion over how to set requirements and assess compliance with them; whereas the Member States have taken different approaches to the allocation of resources and prioritisation of official checks; whereas this has led to different levels of compliance and risks disadvantaging compliant farmers;

Amendment 94 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital M

M. whereas the directives on pigs (for pregnant sows), calves and laying hens have not led to positive structural changes to the way in which animals are reared, as sows are still caged for nearly half of their life and routine tail docking and teeth clipping still exist, laying hens are still kept in ‘enriched’ cages, colony cages and combi cages, and it is still permitted to remove calves from their mother and keep them in isolation for four weeks although this is known to cause physical and psychological suffering; whereas in the egg, veal and pigmeat sectors, the directives have led to ~~significant changes to buildings and equipment and played a part in~~ some advances in the number and size of holdings, which is not an advance from animal welfare, environment and human health point of view;

Amendment 95 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital M

M. whereas the directives on pigs (for pregnant sows), calves and laying hens have led to some positive, but limited, structural changes to the way in which animals are reared; whereas in the egg, veal and pigmeat sectors, the directives have led to significant changes to buildings and equipment and played a part in some advances in the number and size of holdings; whereas the species- specific directives and in particular the general Directive 98/58/EC have had modest effect in terms of improving animal welfare;

Amendment 96 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital M

M. whereas ~~the directives on pigs (for pregnant sows), calves and laying hen~~some of the current directives have led to positive structural changes to the way in which animals are reared~~; whereas in the egg, veal and pigmeat sectors, the directives have led to significant changes to buildings and equipment and played a part in some advances in the number and size of holdings~~ (the calves directive concerning the limitation in the use of the individual pens, and the laying hens directives with regards to the definition of multi-layer rearing systems); whereas these Directive as well as the general Farming directive, and the broiler and the pig directives have had little effect in terms of animal welfare;

Amendment 97 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital M a (new)

Ma. whereas main issues meant to be addressed by the legislation remain widespread including mutilations, cramped and stressful conditions, production pressure as well as uneven implementation;

Amendment 98 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital N

N. whereas the laying hens directive has been a success in providing good definitions for the different production systems; whereas this success is limited, however, given the broad range of approaches applied by the Member States to its implementation, ~~which has~~and the Directive’s lack of clear, mandatory and comprehensive provisions, which have enabled distorted competition to persist in the single market;

Amendment 99 #