Animal WelfareEU Strategy 2011-2015

Introduction

•Community Action Plan 2006-2010The Commission's commitment to EU citizens, stakeholders, the EP and the Council for a clear map of the Commission’s planned animal welfare initiatives for the coming years

•Paulsen’s report: May 2010The EP gave its opinion on the 2006 Action Plan by adopting the Paulsen Report. The rapporteur considers that the new action plan should focus on:- a general European animal welfare law;- a European centre for animal welfare and animal health;- better enforcement of existing legislation;- the link between animal health and public health.

Introduction

•Evaluation on the EU policy on animal welfare

- In November 2009, the Commission mandated an external consultant to evaluate the EU policy on Animal Welfare

- The evaluation was completed in December 2010 and will be used as a basis for a future EU Strategy on the protection and welfare of animals 2011-2015

Introduction

The Commission (DG SANCO) is preparing a second EU strategy for

the protection and welfare of animals 2011-2015, which is foreseen to be

adopted in December 2011.

Indicative time frame

• January-March: MS and SH consultations• April: Finalization of impact assessment• September- October: Inter-service consultation• December: Adoption

• The Commission organized a meeting with the Member States on 17th January and with the main EU stakeholders 31st January 2011 to:

- present the result of the evaluation on the EU policy for animal welfare

- present the possible policy options for the future strategy

Evaluation on the EU policy on animal welfare

• Online consultation – 9,086 responses

• Stakeholder interviews – 89 interviews with 196 individuals

• National missions – 12 Member States

• Literature and data review

• Answers to 11 evaluation questions

Main outcomes of the evaluation on the EU-PAW

• Q1: To what extent has EU animal welfare legislation achieved its main objective (i.e. to improve the welfare conditions of animals within the EU?)

- Legislation has improved welfare for those animals covered by targeted legislation

- There is potential to achieve much higher standards by strengthening the enforcement of current EU legislation

Main outcomes of the evaluation on the EUPAW

•Q2: To what extent has EU legislation on the protection of animals ensured proper functioning of the single market for the activities concerned?

- EU animal welfare legislation has contributed to, but not fully ensured, the proper functioning of the internal market

- Harmonisation is important in order to avoid competitive distortions within the internal market

- Specific EU animal welfare legislation has improved the harmonisation of animal welfare standards across the EU

- Factors affecting harmonisation are: a lack of clarity, variations in enforcement, and standards that go beyond EU law

Main outcomes of the evaluation on the EUPAW

• Q10: To what extent do animal welfare policies contribute to the economic sustainability of the sectors concerned

- Widely accepted that animal welfare policies increase costs of businesses in the farming sectors (estimated additional annual costs of €2.8 billion for farm animals),

- Higher standards have business benefits, though usually outweighed by costs

Problem definition

• Enforcement• Competitiveness of farmers• Communication to consumers and stakeholders• Science and innovation• Scope of EU legislation

Enforcement

• Member States problem but…needs EU supervision

• Lack of awareness and training of parties concerned

• Conflicts with economic interests

• Complexity and rigidity of the legislation

Competitiveness of farmers

• Animal welfare additional costs

• EU standards not sufficiently known by consumers

• No equivalent standards in third countries competing with EU producers

Communication to consumers and stakeholders

• 64% consumers are worried for animal welfare (EU average)

• No information for most products

• Most private schemes under 20% market share (national level)

• Stakeholders not sufficiently informed on what to do

Objectives of the future strategy

• Level of animal protection close to the citizens’ concern

• Competitiveness in the EU market

• Consistency between EU and TC

Policy options

• No action

• We do more with same tools (non legislative option)

• We do differently (legislative options)

- Framework law and co-regulation

- Prescriptive regulation

Non legislative (option A)

• Communication and education,

• Corporate Social Responsibility,

• Research,

• Improved coordination,

• International initiatives.

No new law but increased resources.

Legislative options

Framework law and co-regulation = Animal welfare law (Option B)

• More participative (voluntary and compulsory standards)

• Animal welfare indicators (for monitoring procedures)

• Wider scope (Cows? Rabbits? Etc)

Legislative options

Prescriptive regulation (Option C)

• Vertical directives by species

• European Network of Reference Centres

- Applied research (dissemination)

- Education and training

• New financial instruments

• Common penalties

Stakeholders’ opinions and data

• SH understanding and opinion on the options (how you see the option working)

• SH data and experiences in relation to the options

• SH assessment on the possible impacts listed (qualitative and quantitative)

• SH priorities