Andersen (EDD). – (DA) Mr President, the EU is the reason for the long journey times for animals. The implementation of the internal market has required the elimination of the veterinary borders. Systematic veterinary controls at the borders are viewed as technical obstacles to trade. It must be possible to transport livestock freely around the whole of the EU like any other goods. Effective border controls on the transportation of animals are being made unlawful. The Commission’s proposal is a consistent implementation of this idea. The Commission’s proposal ensures that the fullest possible use can be made of all the economic advantages. A small pig born in Sweden can be fattened in Portugal and slaughtered in Poland, as long as savings are thereby made. That is the heart of the Commission’s proposal. Animal welfare has nothing to do with it.

Long journeys amount to cruelty to animals, and livestock diseases are becoming more widespread. Veterinary safety is threatened, with animal and human health suffering as a result. For example, we now have the multi-resistant salmonella DT104 in Denmark. This must be stopped. There must be legislation in relation to the internal market.

Amendment No 100 exempts livestock from the rules governing the internal market. It must be possible to devise more far-reaching national rules governing the transport of animals and the equipping of vehicles. It must be possible to introduce veterinary inspections at the borders with attendant quarantine arrangements. This will be effective in limiting livestock diseases, and it will decisively reduce the number of long journeys so that, as a minimum, the longest journeys will be of eight hours. Moreover, this will apply to all animals, both those that are going to slaughter and those that are for fattening.

In another amendment, I propose that, for journeys of over eight hours, there should be systematic veterinary checks at the beginning of the journey and on the unloading platform at delivery. That is necessary in order constantly to evaluate whether the journeys have been defensible in terms of the animals’ welfare. At present, it is only the driver who provides feedback on the schedule, and this feedback contains no information about the condition of the animals. In the amendment, I also propose that animal transport exceeding eight hours should be subject to a levy towards the funding of checks and supervision. If the controls are to be effective, they will involve costs. The expenses linked to this aspect of livestock production must be defrayed in the form of a charge paid by the haulage contractors to the local authorities. There is no question of an EU tax.