Doslovný záznam ze zasedání

Čtvrtek, 15. března 2007 - Štrasburk

9. Zákaz výrobků z tuleňů v Evropské unii (rozprava)

  Przewodniczący. Kolejnym punktem porządku dziennego jest oświadczenie Komisji dotyczące zakazu na artykuły pochodzące z fok w Unii Europejskiej.

  Σταύρος Δήμας, Μέλος της Επιτροπής. Κύριε Πρόεδρε, αξιότιμα μέλη του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου, σας ευχαριστώ για την ευκαιρία που μου δίνετε να διατυπώσω τη θέση της Επιτροπής σχετικά με την απαγόρευση των προϊόντων φώκιας στην Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση και να αναφερθώ στις δράσεις που έχουν ήδη αναληφθεί ή προγραμματίζονται.

Το κυνήγι της φώκιας αποτελεί εδώ και πολλά χρόνια αντικείμενο διχογνωμιών και έντονων συζητήσεων. Συμφωνώ απολύτως ότι υπάρχουν εύλογα ερωτήματα σχετικά με το κυνήγι της φώκιας, ανεξαρτήτως του πού αυτό λαμβάνει χώρα. Ωστόσο είναι ενθαρρυντικό ότι οι περισσότεροι πληθυσμοί φώκιας φαίνεται να έχουν σταθεροποιηθεί και δεν απειλείται η επιβίωσή τους στο φυσικό τους περιβάλλον. Η άποψη αυτή βασίζεται στα διαθέσιμα επιστημονικά στοιχεία σχετικά με την εξέλιξη των πληθυσμών λευκότριχης γροιλανδικής φώκιας και κυανότριχης λοφιοφόρου φώκιας. Δεν υπάρχουν επιστημονικές αποδείξεις για σημαντικές αρνητικές επιπτώσεις του κυνηγιού στην επιβίωση αυτών των ειδών άγριας πανίδας.

Ο πληθυσμός της φώκιας στο βορειοανατολικό Ατλαντικό έχει αυξηθεί σημαντικά από τις αρχές της δεκαετίας του ’70, από μόλις 2 εκατομμύρια σε περίπου 5,8 εκατομμύρια λευκότριχες γροιλανδικές φώκιες, είδος που αποτελεί τον κύριο στόχο κατά την ετήσια κυνηγητική περίοδο. Με άλλα λόγια δεν απειλούνται επί του παρόντος οι εν λόγω πληθυσμοί φώκιας, κατά συνέπεια δεν εμπίπτουν στη Σύμβαση CITES για το διεθνές εμπόριο των ειδών άγριας πανίδας και χλωρίδας που απειλούνται με εξαφάνιση. Για να συμπεριληφθούν αυτά τα είδη φώκιας στη Σύμβαση CΙΤΕS, θα έπρεπε το διεθνές εμπόριο να απειλεί την επιβίωσή τους στο φυσικό τους περιβάλλον.

Αυτό βέβαια δεν θα πρέπει να μας αποτρέψει από το να ασχοληθούμε με το άλλο σοβαρό ζήτημα που ανακύπτει σχετικά με το κυνήγι της φώκιας σε πολλές χώρες, μεταξύ άλλων και σε ορισμένα κράτη μέλη της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, δηλαδή το ζήτημα του κατά πόσον η εισαγωγή και η εξαγωγή καθώς και η διάθεση στην αγορά προϊόντων από το κυνήγι φώκιας θα πρέπει να απαγορευθούν στην περίπτωση που το κυνήγι αυτό δεν διεξάγεται με τρόπο σύμφωνο με τις προδιαγραφές που έχουμε θέσει σχετικά με την καλή μεταχείριση των ζώων. Αυτός είναι ο λόγος για τον οποίο συμφωνώ ότι, έστω και αν δεν έχουμε ακόμη λάβει νομοθετικά μέτρα σε επίπεδο Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, πρέπει να εξεταστούν λεπτομερώς οι ανησυχίες που έχει διατυπώσει το Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο σχετικά με την καλή μεταχείριση των ζώων και ειδικότερα σχετικά με το κυνήγι της φώκιας. Για το σκοπό αυτό χρειαζόμαστε να έχουμε στη διάθεσή μας τις απαραίτητες σχετικές πληροφορίες και στοιχεία και γι’ αυτό έχουμε ζητήσει τη διενέργεια ανεξάρτητης μελέτης. Με βάση τα αποτελέσματα αυτής της μελέτης, που θα εκπονήσει κατά κύριο λόγο η Ευρωπαϊκή Αρχή για την Ασφάλεια των Τροφίμων, θα αποφασίσουμε να προτείνουμε στο Συμβούλιο και το Κοινοβούλιο τη λήψη μέτρων. Σύμφωνα με τις αρχές της καλής διακυβέρνησης και νομοθεσίας καθώς και με τους σαφείς κανόνες λειτουργίας της Επιτροπής, πρέπει να βασιζόμαστε σε στέρεα επιστημονικά δεδομένα και να έχει γίνει σχετική μελέτη επιπτώσεων πριν να εξετασθεί η λήψη οποιωνδήποτε μέτρων.

Επιπλέον έχω δώσει οδηγίες στις υπηρεσίες μου να εξετάσουν τη δυνατότητα να πραγματοποιήσει η Επιτροπή αποστολή για επιθεώρηση και παρατήρηση του κυνηγιού φώκιας στην κυνηγετική περίοδο του 2007. Τα μέλη του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου μπορούν να εξετάσουν το ενδεχόμενο συμμετοχής τους σ’ αυτήν την αποστολή.

Η πλήρης και αντικειμενική αξιολόγηση όλων των πτυχών του θέματος αυτού θα μας επιτρέψει να πάρουμε τις σωστές αποφάσεις.

  John Bowis, on behalf of the PPE-DE Group. – Mr President, our Commissioner is a reasonable and a humane man. He asks for time for research. We grant him that, but in return he should impose a moratorium on any imports of such seal products during that time.

He says that the seal cull in Canada is sustainable. It may be, but in 2006, 330 000 harp seals were killed and 95% of those were under three months old. A large number of those were then skinned alive, because 79% of sealers do not check adequately as to whether the pup is still conscious.

The cull is cruel and it is not worthy of a civilised country. It is certainly not sustainable in a country like Namibia. In Namibia, which has the second largest seal hunt in the world, the quotas increase each year. In 2007 the quota was 91 000 and a combination of high quota and natural mortality of seals means that the entire pup population could be annihilated this year.

Seals are not killed for food; they are not really killed to protect fish stocks. They are killed for fashion, and Europe is the market for that fashion. It is the key market for seal skin imports from Canada. Belgium has banned it. Italy and Luxembourg have temporarily banned it. The United Kingdom and Germany have called for an EU-wide ban. The European Parliament in its written declaration has called for a permanent ban and the majority of Members of this Parliament have signed it. So please, Commissioner, ‘yes’ to research, but ‘yes’ also to a moratorium now.

  Paulo Casaca, em nome do Grupo PSE. – Queria fazer minhas as observações que acabaram por ser feitas pelo nosso colega David Bowis.

De facto, não há qualquer razão para que não se proceda imediatamente à moratória e que, posteriormente, sejam feitos os estudos que a Comissão entender. Em relação a esta matéria existe um número de dados impressionantes. Existe também um exemplo claro que já foi dado por outros países, como os Estados Unidos ou mesmo o México (os Estados Unidos há mais de três décadas que proibiram qualquer utilização de focas), e não consigo entender por que razão a Comissão acha que não tem ainda dados suficientes para agir de imediato.

A questão, como já foi muito bem colocada pelo nosso colega, não é apenas uma questão de sustentabilidade, é fundamentalmente uma questão de ética, de saber se faz qualquer sentido, simplesmente para se satisfazer algumas questões de moda, matar de forma absolutamente bárbara - como foi testemunhado por uma delegação do Intergrupo para o Bem-Estar e a Conservação Animal integrada pelo nosso colega Carl Schlyter no ano passado e como nós temos testemunhado das mais variadas maneiras.

Se a Comissão quer conhecer, no local, o que se passa, nós vamos realizar na semana que vem uma missão ao Canadá. Iremos directamente aos sítios onde esta caça está a ter lugar. A Comissão é bem-vinda, tem de certeza lugar nessa missão e poderá esclarecer quaisquer dúvidas que porventura ainda tenha em relação a este problema.

  Marios Matsakis, on behalf of the ALDE Group. – Mr President, sometimes I wonder how it is possible not to see the blindingly obvious, and then I think of the Canadian Government’s persistence in allowing an annual festival of blood-spilling carnage to be carried out on hundreds of thousands of defenceless baby seals.

Other times I wonder how it is possible not to have any feelings in the face of extreme cruelty, and then I think of the thousands of fashion-mad individuals who pay through the nose to wear seal fur, taken in many cases by skinning still-conscious animals.

However, at no time do I wonder how it is possible not to hear what is deafeningly loud, neither do I ever wonder how it is possible not to understand what is comprehensively simple, because, with respect, Commissioner, I have seen this happening only too often when it comes to the way in which the Commission sometimes deals with the European Parliament, and the subject matter under discussion here today is a good example.

In September 2006, Parliament called on the Commission very clearly and very loudly to introduce an EU-wide ban on the trade of all seal products. Six months later the Commission is before us today telling us that, with seal killing being notoriously at the forefront of senseless cruelty to animals for so many years, it still needs more time to consider the matter further.

Being a close friend and ally of the Commission and stretching our patience generously, I think we should give the Commission more time, if that is what it wants, but, as other speakers have said, on the condition that, in the meantime, an immediate moratorium banning all seal products in the EU is put into effect. This is dictated by our firm conviction on the matter, the need to act quickly and the fact that some EU Member States have already proceeded with national bans.

  Carl Schlyter, för Verts/ALE-gruppen. – Herr talman! Herr kommissionär! förra året åkte jag och besökte säljakten i Kanada på Animal Welfair Intergroups vägnar. Säljägarna försökte med våld hindra mig från att se vad som pågick. De rammade vår bil av vägen, de satte sig på våra helikoptrar så vi inte kunde flyga, de hotade med att döda oss om vi lämnade vårt hotell för att försöka dokumentera säljakten. Trots dessa metoder lyckades vi få fotografier och vi såg hur otroligt grym säljakten är. De visste att de hade någonting att dölja. Sälarna flås levande, de klubbas och lämnas att kvävas av sitt eget blod, de skadskjuts och drunknar och de skjuts men får lida extra mycket, för ett andra nådaskott kostar två dollar eftersom pälsen då sjunker i värde.

Det är inte av konserveringsskäl som vi skall förbjuda denna jakt, det är av etiska skäl. Jag vill dock ändå säga att populationen sjönk förra gången man hade massiv jakt. Nu står vi dessutom inför klimatförändringarna, och grönlandssälen behöver istäcke för att kunna dia sina ungar. Många ungar aborteras idag i vattnet. Genom att vara världens största marknad stöder EU denna jakt och parlamentet har tydligt sagt att vi inte vill ha detta på vår marknad. Som Bowis sade så har många länder infört nationella förbud. När det var katt- och hundpäls sade kommissionen: ”Inre marknaden fungerar inte, vi inför ett EU förbud.”. Samma logik gäller även här.

Vill kommissionen ha studier? Det finns många studier som visar de problem som har nämnts här i kammaren, inte minst The Bird and Veterinary Report, men dessa får inte vara en fördröjning av nödvändiga åtgärder. Så om ni vill ha den tiden så kan vi ge er den tiden, men då vill vi ha ett temporärt förbud på plats till dess ni är klara, och ni får hitta den lagliga grund som det skall bygga på. Jag tackar er för att ni har valt EFSA:s djurskyddskommitté att göra studien. Då har det godkänts och blivit oberoende och representativt av ländernas vilja.

Jag vill påpeka att det i de länder som jagar säl – det är Kanada, Norge, Ryssland och Namibia – inte i något fall är av vitalt intresse för ekonomin. Vi ser från valjakten att när den avskaffades och ersattes med valsafari så var det mera lönsamt, så vi kan även hjälpa själva säljägarna att få en bättre ekonomi om de får sluta med denna grymma hantering.

  Erik Meijer, namens de GUE/NGL-Fractie. – Voorzitter, zeehonden zijn al jarenlang een bedreigde diersoort. Hun aantal is niet alleen gedaald door ziektes of door vervuiling van het zeewater langs dichtbevolkte kusten, maar ook door de toenemende jacht. Een tijdlang leken de zeehonden in sommige kustgebieden volledig uit te sterven. Ook nu er in sommige gebieden enig herstel van de zeehondenstand wordt geconstateerd, blijft de noodzaak van voortgezette bescherming bestaan.

Het tegendeel van bescherming zien we waar de bezitsdrang van mensen de vrije loop krijgt. De huid van zeehonden wordt begeerd om er kleding en speelgoed mee te versieren. Het dood knuppelen en levend villen van jonge zeehonden is het schandelijke middel om in die bezitsdrang te voorzien. Sommige kustbewoners zijn economisch afhankelijk geworden van deze weerzinwekkende activiteit. De mogelijkheid om zeehondenhuiden te exporteren en daarvoor ver van de plaats van de misdaad kopers te vinden, houdt dit systeem in stand. Daarom is het al vele jaren hard nodig ervoor te zorgen dat dit soort producten niet meer te koop is, in het bijzonder in de rijkste delen van de wereld zoals Europa.

Uit het eerste deel van de verklaring van commissaris Dimas blijkt dat hij de verontrusting van het Europees Parlement en van de publieke opinie hierover deelt. De uitkomst daarna is echter teleurstellend. Er is geen enkel bezwaar tegen een impactstudie en het is goed als er meer inspectie ter plaatse in Canada en Namibië komt. Maar dat kan geen rechtvaardiging zijn om verder af te wachten.

Sommige lidstaten van de Europese Unie hebben al maatregelen tegen de import genomen, net als de Verenigde Staten. Waarom moet een deel van de Europese landen hierbij achterblijven? Er is alle reden voor een onmiddellijk moratorium zonder verder af te wachten. Zelfs als we dat morgen invoeren, komt het jaren te laat gezien de ernstige situatie. Dus ik vraag u nadrukkelijk om de studie niet te gebruiken als een rechtvaardiging voor verder uitstel.

  Stavros Dimas, Member of the Commission. Mr President, I would like to thank all the speakers for their very constructive contributions to this afternoon’s discussion.

First of all, I would like to repeat that from the conservation point of view there is no basis to take any action, because in 1970s we had 2 million seals of the most hunted species, and now we have 5.8 million of these seals. We are looking only at the second issue – it is very important.

As regards the study, firstly I have to repeat that the Commission fully recognises the high level of public concern regarding the application of humane killing methods, and in line with its commitment to high animal welfare standards, we will examine all available information. There are reports – which are partly contradictory – that seals are being hunted and killed in some regions in an inhumane way. The assessment that I referred to – and which one of the speakers found to be necessary – will present balanced, objective and operational conclusions and recommendations. The overall outcome should enable the Commission to draw some conclusions and to come back with possible legislative proposals if this is warranted by the situation.

Regarding the moratorium, in legal terms the Commission does not have available an immediate remedy to impose a moratorium on the import, export and trade in seal products. It would not be possible to refer to the safeguard measures provided for under the public health and animal policy that would allow for a temporary ban when public or animal health is threatened. For example, the decision to temporarily suspend imports of wild birds was adopted in order to protect animal and public health because of the risk of a worldwide spread of avian influenza.

Furthermore, under the trade policy there is no immediate remedy possible. Any measure the European Union decided to adopt would need to be necessary and proportional and would need to be notified to the World Trade Organization. At this stage it is therefore not appropriate, nor is it feasible, to impose an immediate trade ban.

The Commission first needs to carry out an objective assessment of all available information. The outcome of this assessment should enable the Commission to draw sound conclusions and to come back with possible legislative proposals if this is warranted by the situation.

Reference was made to the United States, and its Marine Mammal Protection Act was enacted in 1972, which was before the International Convention on Trade in Endangered Species entered into force in 1975. Furthermore, Member States have the opportunity to impose measures according to the case law of the European Court of Justice, but the Community has no such legal basis.

I would ask you to urge your governments in your Member States to impose bans – they have the legal means. We need to have the appropriate legal basis before we can impose bans at European Union level and that is what we are trying to do by having an impact assessment and by gathering information. However, if you show your concern in your countries and urge your governments to impose bans, this will facilitate internal market reasons for the European Union to take steps.

Finally, I wish to reiterate that the Commission is strongly committed to high animal welfare standards, both within the European Union and at international level. A full objective assessment of the animal welfare aspects of seal hunting will allow us to see the whole picture and have a solid basis before drawing any conclusions. We shall examine all available information and take the necessary steps. If it is established that seals are being hunted and killed in an inhumane way, a ban on the import and export, as well as the placing of products derived from the seal hunt on the market, will also be considered.

We will report back to the European Parliament within the shortest possible time. I repeat that we have already asked the European Food Safety Authority to conduct the scientific part of the study, and I have written to the Canadian Government to ask that we be allowed to participate in a mission, and the European Parliament is also invited to participate in order to see how the hunt is being organised. What you said previously about your experiences is very interesting.

  Przewodniczący. Pan poseł Beazley bardzo proszę, rozumiem, że w sprawie wniosku formalnego.

  Christopher Beazley (PPE-DE). – Mr President, before the Commissioner speaks, I just wonder if it is in order to put a supplementary question to him on the timing of his statement. It is over 25 years since the European Parliament first raised this issue. When the Commissioner very helpfully said that he would report back in the shortest possible time, could he be more specific as to exactly how long he anticipates that time might be?

  Stavros Dimas, Member of the Commission. I saw in your letter that you fear the study will take years. That is not so. It is a matter of months.

  Przewodniczący. Zamykam debatę.