The Commission considers that the common position
adopted by the Council with qualified majority reflects the
original goals of the Commission's proposal and takes into
account many concerns of the European Parliament.
To recall, the European Parliament adopted its
position at first reading on 15 April 2014 and supported the main
goals of the Commission's proposal. In particular, the European
Parliament:
- expressed its support for the principle that
prevention is better than cure and welcomed the attempt to
bring together the current dispersed animal health legislation into
one single set of principles;
- approved the scope of the proposed act, which is about
transmissible animal diseases;
- welcomed the "one health" approach establishing a
clear link between animal welfare and animal and public
health.
The Commission indicated that it could accept in full,
in part, in principle or subject to rewording 106 of the 331
amendments, proposed by the Parliament at first
reading.
Following the adoption of the European Parliament's
first reading position, informal discussions continued between the
European Parliament, the Council Presidency and the Commission,
with a view to concluding an agreement at the common position stage
('early second reading agreement').
1) Amendments incorporated in full or in part in the
position of the Council at first reading:
- proposed new title for the proposal to better
describing its focus on transmissible animal diseases;
- categorisation of animal diseases and emerging
diseases;
- proposed the retention of Regulation (EC) No 1760/2000
on bovine identification and beef labelling, which the animal
health proposal aimed to repeal;
- ensure that animal welfare is taken into account when
considering or implementing animal health measures.
2) Amendments rejected by the Commission and
incorporated in full, in part or in principle in the position of
the Council:
Listing of animal diseases:
- The European Parliament proposed to eliminate the
Commission’s implementing powers enabling to establish the
list of animal diseases and species to which the rules in the
Regulation apply, and the categorisation of diseases into different
groups according to which measures are appropriate for them. The
European Parliament proposed to list the diseases in an Annex to
the Regulation, but to provide the Commission with delegated powers
to amend or supplement that list.
- The Council proposed that a short list of five
significant diseases is written into the enacting part of the
Regulation, but that the listing of the remaining of diseases, as
well as the categorisation of all the listed diseases, and listing
of species, should be done through implementing acts. The Council
also added more criteria for the listing and categorisation of
animal diseases, which in their view added the missing essential
elements to the enacting part of the Commission
proposal.
- The Parliament recognised the value of these
additional essential elements providing more detailed criteria for
disease listing and categorisation. It also agreed to the proposed
list of five diseases and to the possible listing of other diseases
in an Annex amendable by delegated act, while implementing powers
were preserved for the categorisation of animal
diseases.
Consultation with stakeholders and
scientists:
- The European Parliament required several types of
specific consultation when drawing up delegated acts. Contrary to
Article 290 (2) TFEU, some of those amendments set out a legally
binding obligation for the Commission to conduct these
consultations.
- The Commission cannot accept the amendments of the
European Parliament which are contrary to Article 290(2) of TFEU.
However, it can agree to the wording in the Council position
whereby it would consult experts, stakeholders and the European
Food Safety Authority, as well as engage in wider public
consultations, when and as appropriate.
Review clause (report by the
Commission):
- Parliament asked the Commission to submit a report on
the impact of the Regulation by 31 December 2019. The Council also
requested a reporting obligation in a recital or in an Article,
while avoiding any unnecessary administrative burden.
Animal welfare:
- Some amendments on animal welfare were accepted by the
Council while others went further providing animal welfare rules,
thus interfering with the existing animal welfare legislation.
Also, all amendments that were overlapping or inconsistent with the
existing requirements - or putting at risk animal and public health
- were not incorporated in the Council's position. The Commission
supports this position.
- The European Parliament could eventually drop or
adjust several of its amendments but asked the Commission for a
commitment to take future action for the protection of animals
through a statement on animal welfare. The Commission
exceptionally agreed to make a statement.
Antimicrobial resistance:
- Amendments obliging actors to consider or raise
awareness on the risks of antimicrobial resistance are acceptable,
while amendments interfering with the legislation on veterinary
medicines cannot be supported as they go beyond the scope of this
proposal.
- Parliament also insisted on setting up a
responsibility of operators for a responsible use of veterinary
medicines as in their view such a clear obligation was needed in
the EU legislation to establish a link with the proposal on
veterinary medicines. The Council accepted in principle this
amendment and was supportive of the joint statement by the
European Parliament, Council and the Commission on the
antimicrobial resistance.
- The Commission also agreed, as a compromise, to make a
statement on the regular reporting on the use of veterinary
antimicrobial medicinal products.
Other professionals and professional bodies carrying
out certain tasks on behalf of the competent
authority:
- The European Parliament requested that certain
professionals, such as bee health professionals, would be
recognised on the same basis as veterinarians and that certain
other qualified individuals or professional bodies would be allowed
to carry out certain tasks.
- The Council addressed the same questions by opening
the possibility for Member States to authorise other professionals
for certain tasks while taking into account the subsidiarity
principle enabling Member States to take their own decisions
concerning authorisation based on the existing national
structures.
Animal health laboratories:
- The European Parliament envisaged requirements for
official animal health laboratories. The Commission cannot agree
with these amendments. In a spirit of a compromise, the Council
proposed a new Article linking the laboratory requirements in the
animal health and official controls proposals.
3) Amendments of the European Parliament rejected by
the Commission and not incorporated in the position of the
Council: these concern amendments
which seek to:
- provide that Member States adopt strategic measures
for diseases, including those that are assessed as not relevant for
the Union and therefore not listed for Union
intervention;
- regulate the use of the veterinary medicinal products
in the Union;
- allow a Member State to restrict the movements of
animals or products if the Member State itself judges that it is
scientifically justified and necessary to prevent the introduction
or spread of any disease;
- define stray, feral or ‘non-kept’ animals as
different categories from ‘wild’ animals;
- set up a compulsory registration of all dogs and, when
appropriate, set up a database;
- retain the Regulation (EU) No 576/2013 on the
non-commercial movement of pet animals which was to be repealed by
the animal health proposal;
- retain Regulation (EC) No 21/2004 on ovine and caprine
identification and registration, and Directive 2008/71/EC on pig
identification and registration;
- introduce a new category of "kept aquatic animals"
thus separating ‘aquaculture’ and other ‘kept
aquatic’ animals.
4) New provisions introduced by the
Council: the Council's position was
considered acceptable to the Commission regarding the new
provisions on transitional periods, the transitional measures
(recognition of acquired rights) and the registration obligation of
certain operators conducting assembly operations.
In conclusion, although
on certain elements the common position differs from the
Commission's original proposal, the Commission considers that it
represents a carefully balanced compromise and is satisfied
that it covers all issues considered essential by the Commission
when adopting its proposal.