Injecting animal welfare in renewed EU-Latin American trade relationships

18 July 2023

As leaders from the EU and from the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) gather in Brussels for the third EU-CELAC summit, willingness to accelerate the conclusion of controversial trade agreements is on the agenda. What’s at stake for animals?

During the EU-CELAC Summit on 17-18 July, the Executive Vice-President of the European Commission and Ministers of Foreign Affairs of Mercosur countries reiterated their “determination to work towards the conclusion of the Agreement between the EU and MERCOSUR by the end of 2023”. 

Instead of pushing forward an unsustainable and harmful trade policy, the EU should redesign  its trade deals to be compatible with the EU Green Deal and the Farm-to-Fork Strategy.  These deals, as exemplified by the EU-Mercosur FTA, grant further unconditional market access to animal based products, leading to an increase in the trade and further fuelling the intensification of farming both in the EU and abroad. This trend not only implies poor animal welfare conditions, but also raises public health concerns in terms of zoonoses and antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Intensification of animal production also generates high levels of deforestation, impacting the welfare of millions of wild animals.

For all these reasons, Eurogroup for Animals, together with 50 civil society organisations from South America and Europe, and with the support of MEPs from the Greens/EFA, the Left and S&D, organised an international conference calling for ‘A new EU-Latin America trade relationship for the 21st Century’. 

The Left in the EP

During the conference, a wide range of speakers from the EU and South America agreed that the EU-Mercosur deal is toxic for indigenous people, workers, the environment and animals, and that the proposed additional protocol offers nothing more than cosmetic, unenforceable adjustments. Furthermore, the risks of the deal aggravating deforestation cannot be restrained by the recent EU legislation on imported deforestation, given that the legislation ignores many products that contribute to deforestation and other biomes destroyed by intensive agriculture. For example, soy-fed animals such as poultry are not covered by the legislation. 

Other speakers echoed Eurogroup for Animals’ criticism of the EU-Mexico and EU-Chile agreements. These deals have had devastating consequences for local communities, including pollution and destruction of natural habitats, and  their “modernised”  versions are likely to have further negative impacts on animal welfare, human rights, deforestation, the climate crisis and biodiversity. While the agreements do include some animal welfare provisions – including on animal sentience and growth promoters and, in the case of Mexico, a standalone chapter on animal welfare and antimicrobial resistance – the language is weak and will do nothing to offset the negative impacts unconditional trade liberalisation will have on animals, people and the planet.

All eyes are now on the European Commission, the European Parliament and the Council to avoid fast-tracking the EU-Chile and the EU-Mexico FTAs by side-stepping national and regional parliaments and removing Member States’ veto right. This is critical given the range of negative impacts the agreements will have on animal welfare, human rights, the climate crisis and biodiversity. Concerning the EU-Mercosur FTA, Eurogroup for Animals calls for a full renegotiation of the deal, including conditioning all trade preferences granted in the agreement to EU-equivalent animal welfare standards.

Regards Mark

Industrial animal farming can continue polluting as the European Parliament waters down emissions directive

12 July 2023

CIWF

The European Parliament has voted to exclude emissions from industrial cattle farms from the Industrial Emissions Directive. The Parliament also voted for scrapping the Commission’s proposal for updated thresholds for pig and poultry farms. Thereby the proposal from the European Commission, that could reduce emissions from the largest polluters that keep animals in cramped conditions, is substantially weakened and puts the EU off track on its climate commitments.

The Industrial Emissions Directive controls emissions from the largest industrial installations in the EU, including a small number of the largest pig and poultry farms. Any installation controlled by the IED is forced to reduce emissions into air, water and soil and needs a permit to operate. With the European Commission proposal, the Directive would increase the coverage from 18% to 60% of emissions of ammonia from cattle, pigs and poultry, and extend the coverage from 3% to 43% of methane emissions. 

The Parliament voted for going back to the current insufficient thresholds of 750 Livestock Units that only cover farms with 40,000 poultry, 2,000 pigs and 750 sows or more, with cattle farms entirely excluded. This stands in stark contrast to the Commission’s proposal of 150 Livestock Units which would cover all large farms, including cattle as it is the main emitter. In numbers this would mean that farms with example 500 pigs, or 150 dairy cows, or 10,700 laying hens or 21,400 broiler chickens would be included while the Directive would not affect small and medium sized farms.

In addition, the result of the Parliament’s vote shows a declining ambition even below the current Industrial Emissions Directive by further reducing the obligations for the industrial poultry and pigs farms with 750 Livestock Units and that will be covered by the Directive.

Animal farming is responsible for 67% of EU ammonia emissions and more than 50% of EU methane emissions. Cattle farming is by far the biggest source of methane emissions from agriculture. Failure to reduce these emissions puts the EU on track to break its commitment under the Global Methane Pledge (pledging to reduce methane emissions by 30% by 2030) as well as failing on its Zero Pollution Action Plan. In order to reduce emissions it will be necessary to address more of the large livestock farms. In addition to the negative impact the intensification of animal farming has had on animals, a strong Industrial Emissions Directive would bring significant health and environmental benefits for citizens.

Overall, the Parliament’s vote points to an even lower climate ambition than the agreed position by the Council. Earlier in spring, the Environmental Ministers agreed to include cattle in the scope but increase the thresholds as compared to the Commission’s proposal. The revision of the Industrial Emissions Directive will now go to interinstitutional negotiations (trilogues) between the Council, Parliament and the Commission. The results of the negotiations can potentially mean that the IED will continue to exempt the majority of the largest polluters.

The debate around the Industrial Emissions Directive has pinpointed how EU animal farms have intensified during the last years, with detrimental impact on animal welfare and with the EU potentially failing to address their emissions if this is not rectified in trilogues. 

For more information, please see the briefing by Eurogroup for Animals’ members Compassion in World Farming and FOUR PAWS.

Regards Mark

Breaking – Three UK supermarkets sell antibiotic dosed chickens linked to deadly superbug outbreak

Three UK supermarkets sell antibiotic dosed chickens linked to deadly superbug outbreak | ITV News

Three of the UK’s biggest supermarkets are sourcing chickens dosed with antibiotics by a poultry producer in Poland linked to the spread of deadly superbugs.

An investigation by ITV News, The Bureau of Investigative Journalism, and The Guardian has discovered Asda, Iceland and Lidl are buying frozen chicken products from SuperDrob – a major European meat supplier – who we’ve discovered was the source of an outbreak of antibiotic resistant Salmonella in the UK and Europe in 2020, which killed five people and infected around 1,300 others. 

A letter obtained via Freedom of Information request from the UK’s Chief Veterinary Office Christine Middlemiss to her Polish counterpart in December 2020 stated her investigations “have now firmly linked the outbreaks with frozen, raw breaded chicken products imported from Poland, and to a specific poultry production company in Poland”. SuperDrob is then named in the letter as the company. 

Two and half years on, we carried out tests of waste samples collected from different poultry farms in different locations in Poland which produce chickens for SuperDrob, to see if antibiotics are being given to the chickens. The results indicated they are.

The samples tested positive for bacteria – including E. Coli, a source of food poisoning in humans – resistant to fluoroquinolones, the same group of antibiotics used in humans to treat life threatening infections. 

The tests were carried out at the University of Oxford by Professor of Medical Microbiology, Tim Walsh and his team. He told ITV News it is “extremely concerning” that the same antibiotics used to treat sickness in human beings are still being used in animals. 

“There is a direct link between the use of antibiotics in farms and the resistance that occurs, and then what happens in the human population,” he said. 

“We found enrofloxacin resistance, which would then give resistance to a drug that is a very similar drug we use in humans called ciprofloxacin. So, the use of enrofloxacin on the farms would actually mediate resistance to a human antibiotic, which is really important. 

“We know that this shouldn’t be happening but regrettably it seems to continue.” 

The samples also tested positive for colistin; an antibiotic of last resort used to treat very serious infections in humans. 

“Colistin should be banned for use in animals per se,” argues Professor Walsh. 

He likened the rise of antibiotic resistance to the whole human race “staring down the barrel of a gun”, or “a slow tsunami coming towards us.” 

The World Health Organisation has declared antimicrobial resistance a top global public health threat, directly killing more than 1.2 million people and associated with five million deaths in 2019. 

The United Nations estimates up to ten million deaths could be caused by superbugs and associated forms of antimicrobial resistance by 2050, matching the annual global death toll of cancer.  

As a result, the use of antibiotics in farming is subject to strict rules. 

Last year the European Union banned the excessive and routine use of antibiotics in farm animals as compensation for unhygienic cramped conditions where diseases like salmonella and E. coli can easily spread, often on factory farms. 

The new regulations mean that only sick, individual animals may be administered antibiotics.  

SuperDrob told us antibiotics are used in their chickens, and the company does not deny using the same groups of antibiotics used to treat human infection. 

A spokesperson said: “SuperDrob has imposed a reduction policy of a minimum of 10% year-on-year, with a view to phasing out the use of enrofloxacin and colistin in poultry treatment by the end of 2025.  This policy was initiated in 2020 and SuperDrob has achieved at least the minimum reduction each year.   

“Antibiotics are only used in SuperDrob’s farms or in the farms of its suppliers when (1) recommended by a veterinarian, and (2) justified by presence of a disease and where administration of antibiotics would achieve therapeutic success. The whole treatment process is recommended, supervised, and coordinated by the Government veterinarian based on knowledge, case analysis, results of testing.” 

SuperDrob declined to comment on the salmonella outbreak in 2020. 

Wow, what a surprise (I dont think)– Mark

13 June 2023

Eurogroup for Animals welcomes the update to the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, which for the first time includes an explicit mention of animal welfare.

On 8 June 2023, the OECD released a “targeted update” of the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises on Responsible Business Conduct, which for the first time calls on businesses to uphold animal welfare in their policies and practices. The guidelines, which are regarded as a global benchmark for ethical business practices, could have far-reaching positive implications for animals across the 38 member countries of the OECD.

Unlike the 2011 Guidelines, which did not discuss animal welfare, the updated Environment chapter calls on enterprises to respect international animal welfare standards and describes “good welfare” as requiring, among other things, that the animal is healthy, comfortable, and well nourished, provided a stimulating and appropriate environment, ensured humane handling, and subjected only to humane slaughter or killing:

85. Enterprises should respect animal welfare standards that are aligned with the World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH) Terrestrial Code. An animal experiences good welfare if the animal is healthy, comfortable, well nourished, safe, is not suffering from unpleasant states such as pain, fear and distress, and is able to express behaviours that are important for its physical and mental state. Good animal welfare requires disease prevention and appropriate veterinary care, shelter, management and nutrition, a stimulating and safe environment, humane handling and humane slaughter or killing. In addition, enterprises should adhere to guidance for the transport of live animals developed by relevant international organisations.

While animal welfare has not consistently been considered a Responsible Business Conduct (RBC) issue, the new additions make clear that respecting animal welfare is part of due diligence and necessary to ensure RBC. The text allows civil society to file complaints via National Contact Point (NCP) mechanisms and engage directly with enterprises regarding their failure to ensure, through due diligence, good animal welfare for animals in their value chains. This marks a significant improvement on the previous Guidelines and we are grateful that civil society had the opportunity to provide input during the public consultation phase.

Nonetheless, the language on animal welfare leaves some room for improvement. First, the guidance to align with WOAH standards is disappointing, given that these are often much less ambitious than EU welfare standards. Further, in emphasising the necessity to comply with existing laws and regulations, the guidance overlooks the need to proactively minimise potential harms. Also, there is nothing about the need to strive for a good quality of life for animals, nor to decrease the amount of live animal transport journey time. The OECD is therefore urged to issue improved guidance moving forward.

This update is also highly welcome as it coincides with the preparation of mandatory due diligence legislation in the EU, which draws partly from the OECD Guidelines. The EU legislation will seek to embed sustainability in  global value chains by ensuring EU companies  identify, prevent or repair environmental and/or human rights adverse impacts. However, the legislative proposal makes no reference to animal welfare at present. Eurogroup for Animals therefore calls on the Council and the European Parliament to remedy this omission in the wake of this update, and to include robust and explicit language on animal welfare during the trilogue stage.

Regards Mark

8 June 2023

Photo – Mark

The importance of a comprehensive and ambitious revision of the animal welfare legislation took centre stage at Eurogroup for Animals’ annual conference in Brussels.

Yesterday, over two hundred guests from all over Europe came together in Brussels and more than one hundred participants followed the online streaming for Eurogroup for Animals’ annual conference, just months before the European Commission (EC) is set to unveil its revised legislation on animal welfare. 

This conference comes at a critical moment in time and animal protection organisations, along with MEPs, are calling on the European Commission to uphold its commitment to animal welfare, and to ensure a bold new legislation that allows for the true protection of animals. 

Held at the Royal Library of Belgium, the event hosted Eurogroup for Animals’ member organisations from 26 Member States, MEPS, representatives of the European Commission, and other stakeholders.

The organisation was honoured to welcome Peter Singer, Professor of bioethics and author of ‘Animal Liberation Now’, The book is a revised version of the classic ‘Animal Liberation’, which was one of the foundations of today’s animal protection movement. 

I am delighted to be able to present my new book, ‘Animal Liberation Now’, at the annual conference of Eurogroup for Animals. This book renews and brings fully up to date the ideas I presented in 1975 in Animal Liberation. Since that time, there has been a significant improvement in the conditions in which hundreds of millions of animals live in Europe, especially those in factory farms, and Eurogroup for Animals has been leading the way in its advocacy of these changes. Nevertheless, these reforms still fall far short of what is required for us to treat animals ethically, and without speciesism. What happens in Europe is important not only for animals in Europe, but worldwide, as it sets an example of what’s possible. The EU institutions have the opportunity to be a leader

Peter Singer

Peter Singer at Eurogroup for Animals’ Conference

During the event, Tilly Metz MEP (Greens, LU) insisted that the revision should not be further delayed because of the Regulatory Scrutiny Board that failed to analyse the long-term impact of such policies:“The science is clear, there is enough data, it is incomprehensible that this is delayed any further,” she said.

Niels Fugslang MEP (S&D, DK) expressed the strong desire among MEPs to have an Animal Welfare Commissioner, a significant role that will ensure more accountability and which has been widely supported by citizens. 

The importance of securing a budget to protect farmers and support them in transitioning to cage-free systems was put forward by Andrea Gavinelli, Head of the Animal welfare and Antimicrobial Resistance Unit (EC), a remark supported by Joanna Stawowy, Member of the Cabinet of the European Commissioner for Agriculture.

“2023 is a critical year for the animals – after ten years, change is in sight, as the EC is set to revise its animal welfare legislation which is seriously outdated when it comes to science and civil societies’ demands. Over 20 EFSA opinions have not been incorporated in actual legislative provisions. This has resulted in a dire situation for the animals across the board. With 5- soon to be 6- European Citizens Initiatives calling for better animal welfare, the institutions can’t ignore this any longer. We trust the European Commission will uphold its commitments”, commented Reineke Hameleers, CEO, Eurogroup for Animals. 

“Factory farming is the biggest cause of food waste in the world, it undermines the very thing we all need – healthy soil. Not addressing the meat and dairy industry will mean that climate, biodiversity and food security talks will fail. Regenerative farming is the only way forward, we simply cannot afford not to change,” added Philip Lymbery, President of Eurogroup for Animals.

Keynote speaker Melanie Challenger, writer, researcher and broadcaster on environmental history, philosophy of science and bioethics added: “This is both an exciting and a testing time for our relations with other animals. Our exploitation of non-human animals has increased at the same time as our moral sensitivity, and those two shifts are out of sync. Exceptional times require exceptional responses. I believe we need to recognise the dignity of other species and find ways to allow them to be heard in the political arena.”  

During the event, Eurogroup for Animals presented its awards, which aim to acknowledge the efforts of member organisations and corporates in their fight for animal welfare. Djurens Rätt was awarded the Campaign for Animal Award for their campaign “The World’s Best Animal Welfare”, which featured an animated short movie that reflects the life of broiler chickens, and was streamed across cinemas in Sweden. 

The Corporate Campaign Award was presented to IKEA Belgium for offering innovative solutions to the substitution of animal products and the use of animals in their products. GAIA, which submitted the candidature, welcomed the award: “We nominated IKEA Belgium for its commitment and approach. This is highly visible to both staff and customers in their restaurants where plant-based alternatives are given priority and are also offered at lower costs. This is the way forward for other businesses”, commented Ann De Greef, CEO at GAIA. 

Participants at conference

Regards Mark