Report from the german organizationAnimals ’Angels e.V. August 5, 2021
Heat wave in Greece – temperatures up to 47 ° C – but animal transports continue!
An Animals ‘Angels team is on site on the motorway in the north of the country.
Many of the sheep and lambs are transported from Romania.
The government there recently instructed the veterinary authorities not to have these animals transported on four levels, but on a maximum of three levels.
This should give them more space and allow the air to circulate better. So much for the theory.
But the new decree is apparently ignored by the transporters, because it endangers their profits.
In the truck with three levels, we therefore see far too many animals – even more than usual – squeezed together.
They are so close that they can hardly move anymore. In addition, some of the vehicles are not built to transport the animals on less than four levels.
As a result, most of the water troughs are not at the level of the animals. Many cannot get to them and remain thirsty in the extreme heat.
Ok, we will take back our own control and stop live animal exports !
In 2019 over 1,600,000,000 (One thousand, six hundred MILLION) ovines (sheep), bovines (caattle), poultry and pigs were transported alive across the European Union and to non-European (EU) countries. Journeys can last several days or even weeks, exposing animals to exhaustion, dehydration, injury, disease and even death.
Routinely, investigations on live transport both via sea and road find serious breaches of the utter farce which is known as Council Regulation 1/2005 (Transport Regulation); supposedly for the ‘protection’ of animals in transport.
Official audits confirm NGOs’ investigations findings. In 2017, 2018, and 2019, DG SANTE audited 11 Member States and visited Turkey: shortcomings with different levels of severity were found in the majority of them concerning transport both via sea and by road. For instance, the audits carried out in France, one of the biggest EU exporters of live animals, concluded that “the measures in place do not provide satisfactory assurances that exports of live animals operate smoothly and that these journeys are correctly planned and carried out in line with animal welfare requirements to prevent causing unnecessary pain, suffering or injury to the animal”. Particularly problematic is when trucks and vessels load very young animals that are still on milk dietary (unweaned animals).
WELFARM and AWF followed a truck loaded with 155 young calves being transported from Poland to the Franco-German border. Investigators found that the animals were kept in the truck for 20 hours, with no breaks or unloading and no access to water and food, in clear breach of the Transport Regulation detailed above.
It’s even worse in the summer months, when temperatures as high as 30 degrees Celsius create hellish conditions, causing even more health and welfare problems to the animals being transported. Over this period the demand for live animals by third countries increases due to the ‘Festival of Sacrifice’. As a consequence, large numbers of live sheep and cattle are sent to the Middle East via European ports (Cartagena, Midia, Rasa, and Sete are the major exit points for live export) and the Bulgarian/Turkish border, which remains a hotspot with crisis happening every year.
In the past years we have seen the ineffective EU Commission sending letters to the ineffective EU competent authorities warning them about the risk for animal welfare related to the high temperatures. With some exceptions, its calls remained unheard over the years.
The case of Romania is emblematic: a DG SANTE audit revealed how poorly the country is implementing the EU Transport Regulation, moreover it exported 70,000 sheep in disregard of legally binding animal welfare standards and the call of the then EU Commissioner V. Andriukaitis to stop that operation.
In addition to these long journeys impacting the animals welfare, they’re also badly treated by operators with inadequate equipment. Recently we witnessed what happens if one of these ships perishes: the death by drowning of both animals and human beings. Also, organisations have shown that upon arrival in third countries, the majority of the animals are handled in a brutal manner and slaughtered without stunning.
A recent investigation revealed the cruelty with which French farm animals are treated when they reach slaughterhouses in Morocco and Lebanon.
The transport of live animals to non-EU countries is particularly problematic. Besides the problems at departure, the animals have to endure very long journeys in countries where they cannot benefit from the legal protection they receive in the EU. As confirmed by the cases of the animals on board the vessels Karim Allah and Elbeik, very often contingency plans do not exist, regardless they are mandatory by law.
Despite the verdict by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) establishing mandatory compliance with the EU Transport Regulation provisions until final destination regardless of this being outside the European Union, it is impossible to monitor such a compliance.
De facto this trade continues regardless of the lack of information by Member States and the EU Commission on whether these countries implement EU animal welfare transport standards
Photo – Mark (WAV)
SO, WHAT DOES THE PUBLIC THINK?
Live animal transport emerged as one of the top concerns for EU citizens “for the future of agriculture, fishery and food production in Europe”, in the latest Future of Europe survey.
This was also demonstrated by the success of Eurogroup for Animals’ StopTheTrucks campaign in 2016-2017, which exceeded its target of one million signatures.
POLICY – CURRENT STATE OF PLAY
To allegedly ‘protect the welfare of animals during transport’, the EU set a series of requirements in the Transport Regulation, which entered into force in January 2007 and applies to all the transport across and from the EU. As recently confirmed by the EU Parliament Implementation Report on this matter, the Transport Regulation is outdated and very unevenly implemented.
To shed light on this situation, in 2020 the EU Parliament set up a Committee of Inquiry on live transport to assess the responsibilities of the EU Commission and the EU Member States in implementing and enforcing the Transport Regulation.
Meanwhile, the EU Commission announced the revision of the Transport Regulation in the framework of the EU Farm to Fork Strategy. To make sure the revised text will enhance animal welfare and support the building up of a sustainable food production chain, Eurogroup for Animals wrote a White Paper ‘Live animal transport: time to change the rules’. The paper provides the EU Commission and the EU co-legislators with species- and category-specific provisions and ad-hoc definitions, to ensure the welfare of all the animals transported alive.
Photo – Mark (WAV)
What we (Eurogroup for Animals) want.
Eurogroup for Animals urges the EU to use the revision of the Transport Regulation to introduce both a ban on the transport of live animals outside its borders, and stricter species-specific requirements for transport across the EU (including species-specific maximum journey times).
Additionally, the EU should work on a strategy to shift from live transport to a trade of meat and carcasses as well as genetic material.
What we at World Animals Voice (WAV) want.
At the very least, a complete end to all animals being exported live outside of EU borders.
A priority to be made for trade in carcass meat ‘on the hook, not the hoof’ to take maximum priority over live animal transport to be initiated by the EU.
A one off maximum journey time throughout the EU of 8 hours or less to be applicable for ALL species destined for live transport.
Major emphasis to be placed on a shift throughout the EU for meat and carcass to replace the transport of live animals. Empahasis t be made on plant based foods.
A much needed major review of the paltry regulations defined in Reg 1/2005 on the so called ‘protection’ of animals in transport for animals undertaking an8 hour one off maximum journey.
Guarantees from the EU that all member states will comply with animal transport regulations. Words are not enough, we want actions – member states such as Romania, who are shown to be non compliant, must be banned from the transport of all live animals.
Now that the UK has left the EU (Brexit), and become an independent state once again able to make its own legislation free from the EU, it is currently progressing with an introduction of formal parliamentary legislation which will end the export of live animals for slaughter and further fattening.
Like all UK parliamentary actions, the draft legislation passes between the House of Commons and the Lords, and is scrutinised and amended, until both houses are happy with the draft, which then moves to become formal legislation (law).
Obviously, these actions take time, but they are currently in progress, and soon we hope to announce that the UK has formally stopped the live exports of animals.
But the work for campaigners does not stop with this, which will be seen as a massive victory for animals. Under the EU, live farm animals will continue to be exported. So major attention and actions have to be give to EU campaigner friends to get the ban across the EU.
Pipe dreams ? – maybe, but then a few years back if anyone had said that there was going to be an EU act to ban the caging of farm animals, they would have been laughed out of town. Now it has formally been decided n by the EU, so the hope for very serious actions re live animal transport in Europe is another major campaign. We are confident; like the cages, the EU has to listen and act to its citizens if it wants to retain any credibility.
Like the cage ban, for live exports, it’s time to evolve !
Overcrowded, sick and without water, what are the most common violations of the transport of animals in Spain?
Animal Equality has submitted allegations to the Royal Decree on the transport of animals prepared by the Government.
The main demand requested is the detention of the export of animals outside the European Union for not being able to guarantee their welfare.
The transport of injured or sick animals, in obsolete boats, long waits under extreme temperatures or lack of water or food, are some of the infringements of EU legislation that are observed regularly.
Animal Equality has just presented allegations to the Public Consultation Proposal prior to the modification of the Royal Decree on Animal Health and Protection Standards during Transport called by the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food.
We reviewed with the executive director of the Animal Equality Foundation, Silvia Barquero, what is the current situation of animal transport and what are her allegations.
The main one of these requests is to stop the trade and export of live animals outside the EU.
Reports from the European Commission,Animal Welfare Foundation investigations and their own, certify that the application of European legislation on the protection of animals during transport has been completely deficient in Spain for 30 years.
“We cannot be in the queue on an issue like this,” says Barquero.
In late December, some 1,800 bulls left Spain for Turkey aboard a ship called the Elbeik. The trip was supposed to take around 11 days, then the cattle were to be sold, mostly to halal slaughterhouses, where they’d be killed with minimal suffering, as required by religious law.
At least it would have been swift. For the next three months, as the pandemic began to wreak havoc on global shipping, the vessel failed to unload its cargo, and the animals began to starve, according to an investigation by the Spanish government. Nearly 10% of the bulls died, their corpses thrown overboard or left to fester in the pens among the living. When the Elbeik returned to Spain, authorities ruled its remaining 1,600 animals were too sick to sell and had to be put down.
The Elbeik has become Exhibit A in the mounting case to ban the controversial, $18 billion cross-border trade in live animals. The pandemic has worsened conditions for the roughly 2 billion cows, sheep, goats, pigs and chickens that are exported each year, and epidemiologists have joined the calls for reform. Animals have been stuck in transit far longer than expected and safety inspections have been dramatically curtailed. With new sensitivity to risks that diseased animals can pose to humans, a growing number of countries are limiting or phasing out the practice altogether.
“When it comes to animal welfare, transport by sea is a big black hole,” said Thomas Waitz, an organic farmer from Austria who is a European parliamentary representative on a committee charged with updating the rules for the cross-border shipping of animals. “Ship transports completely fall outside of any regulations or animal-welfare standards. Public health is at risk if animals are transported in conditions where germs and bacteria can flourish.”
The EU, which accounts for more than 75% of the world’s live animal exports, is “incapable of guaranteeing animal welfare,” according to a report commissioned by the committee, which is expected to recommend a new, tighter set of regulations for exporters by the end of the year. The U.K. has gone further, planning to ban the transport of live animals for slaughter altogether, though it hasn’t set a date yet. New Zealand in April said it will phase out trade in live animals by 2023.
Some 39 million tons of meat were exported globally in 2019, most of it slaughtered, packaged and frozen or chilled beforehand — a process that’s more lucrative for meat producers and avoids the health and safety issues of transporting live animals. But as consumers in countries like China and Vietnam have grown wealthier, they’ve added more meat and dairy to their diets, amping up demand for breedstock and dairy animals. The robust market for halal meat among devout Muslims also means demand has spiked in recent years. Prices for live cattle from Australia are at record highs.
Is the EU actually starting to listen to its voting citizens ?
On 23 June 2016 an EU referendum took place and the people of the United Kingdom (UK) voted to leave the European Union (EU).
The UK formally left the EU at the end of 31 January 2020, after being an EU member state since joining on 1st January 1973, along (at that date) with other nations Denmark and the Republic of Ireland.
Why did the UK vote ‘out’ – or ‘Brexit’ ? – a lot of UK citizens were seeing the EU and many (most) of its MEP politicians and Commissioners, as monolithic invertebrates who did little for the wishes and demands of the electorate; the requests of the ‘normal’ EU citizen, it was simple a case of the politicians riding the EU ‘gravy train’; often bettering themselves (in many ways), whilst dismissing the wishes of good European people with ‘yukspeak’ returns to their letters and e mails, asking them why this and that was not being addressed in the EU Parliament.
So, after years of basically very little worthy of mention from the EU, the vertebrate citizens of the UK said they had been given enough rubbish by the EU; and so they voted out, to leave, Brexit. People wanted their personal parliament back with regards rules and regulations, free to decide rather than be told to by the EU.
Personally I was one of them – an ‘outer’. It was not a simple question to ask yourself at tea time one day – do I stay or do I go ? type thing; I debated the issue with myself for months in advance; largely keeping my opinions to myself. There were reasons for this which only other animal campaigners probably understand.
As an animal activist, and having been to the EU in Brussels many times on animal issues; and authoring endless amounts of complaints, reports and investigations into animal suffering issues within the EU, I had over the years, simply been lied to, given false promises, and made to believe time and time again that there were all the regulations and rules in place by the EU masters which thus prevented the evidence I presented at the table from being ‘true’. In other words; the EU political system was basically calling me a liar, and the evidence which I personally presented, along with many other wonderful groups and people in the EU, was simply being dismissed and put into a file known as the ‘EU trash bin’.
As a person with decades of experience dealing with animal transport abuses along with many others; a voice had to be shouted and my opinion noted. Consequently, I voted out of the EU, monolithic, invertebrate, gravy club; and decided that ‘going it alone’ would be the only way for the UK to get back the legislation needed as required by the citizens of the UK. For example; for decades I had been attending demonstrations all over England asking for a ban on the live transport of animals. But, under EU rules, and this is still the case for other EU member states; they (member states) are not allowed to introduce their own national legislation to ban live animal transport. The EU says ‘No’, so no it is; despite overwhelming evidence from a multitude of EU animal welfare organisations showing the EU legislation, in the form of Reg. 1/2005 for the so called ‘protection of animals in transport’, simply was not working. It never has worked, it does not work now, and it never will work in the future. ‘Yukspeak’ to the EU citizen from Brussels; as I have said before.
So, I have been somewhat surprised and amazed to read over the last few weeks, that there is going to be progress in the form of bans on animal cages in the EU.
And the news this morning, 12/7/21; that the European Parliament, is answering to a call from cross party MEPs to clarify how the Commission is planning to deliver on its commitment to proactively reduce and replace the use of animals in EU laboratories
Finally, is the requests of the EU citizen; the ‘normal’ person; being listened to, and more importantly, acted on, by the hierarchy in the ivory tower known and EU Brussels ?
Is there a reason for this ? – are all the years of bullshit and non sensical returns from the EU starting to show them that there are dissident things brewing around Europe ? – is it finally a case of bullshit no longer; the common man now sees clearly through the smokescreen that we, as a EU Parliament and Commission(s), have hidden behind for decades ? – is the emperor starting to lose his clothes ?
The link (source) given at the end is very interesting reading:
Italy would be the most likely of the “Big Four” member states to consider exiting the European Union if Brexit proves to be beneficial to Britain, according to a Euronews-commissioned poll.
Data from the Redfield and Wilton Strategies survey found that nearly half of Italians would be likely to support their country leaving the EU if the UK and its economy are regarded to be in good health in five years.
In the event, France and Spain both showed moderate support for changing its relationship with the bloc, while Germany was the member state least likely of the four major players to consider leaving the Union.
The time came many years ago when the EU should have listened and acted to the wishes of its voting electorate. They failed big time; and only now are we witnessing this rash of new promises and proposals which should make life a bit better for suffering animals. The truth will be in the results and the realities.
On animal transport; as always, there is nothing in the way of real improvement. I read nothing about a ban on live animal long distance transport; instead, I am fed spoonful’s of ‘farm to fork strategies’ on how things are going to be so much better – or in other words; am kind of acceptance by the EU masters that the current system does not really work. Hmm; has this not been said by many for decades ? – why now does the sleeping monolith awaken ?
With the UK being out of Europe, it does not mean that we wipe our hands of EU animal issues; far from it. It does mean though that by getting out, we can set our own better standards in the UK as well as continuing the fight for animal rights with all of our wonderful friends in Europe.
Oh, and by the way; since the UK left the EU a little while ago; the UK government is now putting legislation through parliament which will BAN the export of live animals from British shores.
Reports indicate that the livestock delivered to Israel were living in horrid conditions in the cargo ship, which caused them great suffering.
In 2018 alone, 685,000 animals came to Israel from Australia and Europe. Photo: imago
More than 500,000 calves and lambs passed through Israeli ports in cargo ships during the first half of 2021, according to the Agriculture Ministry, and the Knesset should “act urgently and stop the madness of live shipments,” Animals Now, an Israel-based animal-rights group, said Wednesday in a press release.
Animal shipments to Israel this year have increased 59% compared with 2020, it said. Almost half a million animals were delivered to the country in 2017, it added.
Shipments of animals to Israel come from Australia, Sweden, France and elsewhere.
A bill proposed by Likud MK Miki Zohar would end this practice within three years.
However, in November 2018, the legislative process to pass it was halted due to early elections. Since then, multiple bills have been submitted to stop live animal shipments.
A few bills have been submitted to the current Knesset, spearheaded by Zohar and MKs Sharren Haskel (New Hope), Ibtisam Mara’ana-Menuhin (Labor) and Mossi Raz (Meretz).
The Agriculture Ministry has not imposed sanctions on importers or ship owners who have not complied with the ministry’s guidelines, “Animals Now” said.
Reports indicate that animals that were delivered to Israel were living in horrid conditions while in the cargo ship, which caused them great suffering, it said.
“They do not care about animals,”Animals Now said. “They are only interested in the money they [make] from cramming animals into crowded and polluted ships. We call on MKs and the government to act urgently and stop the madness of live shipments.”
And I mean…In 2019, the bloated carcass of a calf washed up on Zuk Beach in northern Tel Aviv.
A few days later the gruesome incident was repeated. “Where do the dead animals come from?” Asked the bathers angrily. The answer came on the evening news: from the animal transports that regularly ship hundreds of thousands of cows and sheep to Israel.
Died and thrown overboard.
Workers were filmed torturing calves and lambs with electric shocks while they were being unloaded from the ship’s belly. The 20,000 young animals were transported from Australia to the port of Eilat in a week-long journey.
Workers were filmed torturing calves and lambs with electric shocks while they were being unloaded from the ship’s belly. The 20,000 young animals were transported from Australia to the port of Eilat in a week-long journey.
Unloading alone took five long days.
These are images that shock and shake even the toughest.
Sheep, cows, calves and lambs, crammed together in the overheated storage rooms of ships, pounding in front of them and then mistreated.
In between sick and dead animals, smeared with excrement and blood.
Many suffer injuries and broken bones from the rough seas.
Israeli animal welfare organizations reported those responsible for cruelty to animals according to the pictures published by TV channel 13.
The spokesman for “Israel Against Live Shipments” said that in the 15 years the group has been active, he has never seen such cruelty to animals. And yet it is not an isolated case, but a daily reality when transporting live animals.
According to the animal welfare organization, it is common practice to simply throw sick or dead animals overboard. “Many even alive.”
In July 2018, a draft to end live transports was accepted by the Legislative Committee in a preliminary reading.
The proposal aims to reduce the shipping of live animals – hundreds of thousands annually – within the next three years and then ban them completely.
Only meat (chilled or frozen) should then be allowed to be transported to Israel.
Sixty rabbis also wrote a public letter in which they made it clear: “This is neither the Torah nor human morality to allow such cruelty to animals.”
Nothing has happened since then.
“They do not care about animals” says Animals Now.
Neither do our corrupt politicians. And not in the whole world.
They control and organize the animal transports according to their economic profit.
No other exploiter is politically and economically more powerful than the meat mafia.
The meat industry makes most of its profits from the suffering and exploitation of animals.
On the other hand, animal exploitation would be unthinkable without the support of a society that still consumes meat in perverse numbers.
We fight against the meat mafia and against this inveterate, meat-oriented ideology of today’s society.
We have had some small successes, but there is still a long way to go.
And we’ll go it.
WAV Comment: For decades, we (in past forms), along with other massive numbers of animal welfare groups across Europe, have been calling for this. Are we now going to see the EU Commission finally wake up and listen to what people have been asking for years ?
One EU wide labelling system is drastically needed, rather than the current dozen different labelling schemes that include farm animal welfare criteria in at least six European countries. Consumers need to know how their food is produced; is it free range or intensive ? (hopefully cages will go but we need this info earlier); stunned in a slaughterhouse or to religious standards (non stunning / ritual) only ? – we would like to see the country of origin and the country of slaughter; as this will no doubt involve the consumer if the animal involved has suffered live transportation. Labelling needs to apply to ALL products, and to an informative standard, rather than the yukspeak people have had so far. If people knew the facts; we think shoppers would amend their shop drastically. Is this why the EU has never moved on this issue ?
It is time for change, as it was time for change twenty years ago, but then, the EU considered itself above us / more important to bother with issues such as this. People power is now demanding change, and they want it now; as we have seen with the cage systems; consumers want to know where their food comes from. We regard this one standard labelling system as a positive move, but ALL aspects of animal welfare must be given / included to a nowdays much informed consumer.
The days of buying products and not being given any useful information on them has passed, it is now time for change. Bring it on !
Regards Mark
European Commission gives green light for a comprehensive labelling system displaying the well-being of animals over the whole animal food production cycle
7 July 2021
Today, the European Commission’s Subgroup on Animal Welfare Labelling published its final recommendations giving green light for an EU-wide label on animal welfare which will create greater transparency, better opportunities for farmers and a progression framework to improve animal welfare. In order for the labelling system to be effective, it is, however, important the European Commission commits to a mandatory Method Of Production + (MOP+) label which guarantees a harmonised uptake across food industries in the EU.
MOP+ is the most transparent, progressive and fair labelling method. It gives clear and transparent messaging to consumers about how animals are reared as well as allowing for a benchmarking platform amongst existing labels. It also allows for a progression on animal welfare standards by stimulating improvements on animal welfare and providing a full range of products with different levels of welfare to the consumers. On top of that, it provides farmers with a transparent way of demonstrating their achievements on animal welfare, allowing for a fair compensation of their efforts.
The conclusions foresee the labelling to start off as voluntary and state that the possibility of becoming mandatory should be evaluated at a later stage. They also state that a voluntary label represents a great risk to the impact of the label, since not only could the uptake be low but it would also be likely to only be adopted by producers already committed to higher animal welfare standards. The impact of a voluntary label on animal welfare would therefore be lower than of a mandatory label. This would not serve the purpose of providing full transparency to consumers and a fair level playing field for farmers and certainly would not serve the purpose of improving animal welfare across the EU.
Further to that, the recommendations do not mention the coverage of the label in terms of range of production systems. It states animal welfare labels should cover as many individuals as possible. Eurogroup for Animals asks for the scope to be from minimum EU standards to premium standards, also clearly indicating products that do not comply with the minimum EU animal welfare standards, to guarantee the label’s effectiveness.
Other positive key points of the recommendations:
EU animal welfare label should also protect the use of terms and claims indicating a better welfare for animals.
The scope should include not only the rearing but also the slaughter and transport phase. Standards used in animals that are directly involved in the production as sows or cleaner fish should also be included in the label.
Besides fresh products, processed products or products used in food services should also be covered.
The EU label should help harmonise and take existing labels into consideration, helping the consumer gain more clarity on those.
Active participation of all stakeholders is necessary in the creation of an EU wide animal welfare related label and its development should be monitored and evaluated.
Animal welfare is an important part of sustainability, but in case of labelling integration, animal welfare can never be diluted.
Currently, there are a dozen different labelling schemes that include farm animal welfare criteria in at least six European countries, risking the Single Market to becoming fragmented.The European Commission aims to counter this trend and is expected to put forward a proposal for a harmonised food labelling scheme in the context of its Farm to Fork strategy (F2F). At the end of last year, the Council of the European Union on Agriculture and Fisheries also adopted Council Conclusions which had called for an EU-wide animal welfare label aimed at improving animal welfare for as many food producing animals as possible.
WAV Comment – we have taken liberty and snatched a few images from our archives (from Animals Australia etc) just to add what this is about. We still dont think that they have the capacity to understand what this whole issue is about.
We will leave it to our Patron, Philip Woolen to make it clear:
PETA Sends Meat-Themed Crossword to Scott Morrison and Barnaby Joyce
Amid increased discussion about ways to mitigate farmed animal-generated methane – a greenhouse gas that’s up to 30 times more potent than carbon – PETA has sent a unique meat-themed crossword puzzle to Prime Minister Scott Morrison and Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce, among others, urging them to “get a clue” when it comes to the problems with meat.
The puzzle’s clues include, “A small, native marsupial facing extinction, largely because of land clearing for meat production” (koala) and “A slab of muscle, cut from the corpse of an animal who wanted to live” (steak).
In an accompanying letter, we warn leaders of placing all their focus on changing cows’ diets and digestive systems, saying, “No matter what ‘solution’ is latched onto next, be it tinkering with cows’ feed or their microbiomes, it’s always only going to be part of the puzzle.”
As scientists warn that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases must fall by between 25% and 50% to limit global warming to below 2°C, it’s little wonder that animal agriculture and governments are scrambling to try anything – from seaweed to vaccines – to limit the sector’s methane output.
However, we can’t help but notice that by zeroing in on this one problem with meat – when there are so many others – Australia is overlooking the simplest solution: making the transition to a kinder, greener vegan future.
Click the link below for the solutions to the crossword.
Can Morrison and Joyce work it out, or do they need to be given the answers ?
Council Conclusions on live transport by sea: unwelcome, unnecessary and unhelpful
28 June 2021
Press Release
Member States send all the wrong signals to the Commission, as EU citizens expect a ban on live exports and animals deserve better.
At the insistence of the Portuguese Presidency, Agriculture Ministers from across the EU today adopted formal Conclusions on animal welfare during sea transport to third countries, a formal expression of the opinion of all 27 Member States, but one that risks hindering progress.
Better rules for live sea transport won’t mitigate the serious risks associated with this outdated trade. Recent incidents as well as a recent new study by our member Animal Welfare Foundation (AWF) and Robin des Bois on EU- certified livestock carriers proved, once again, that live animal export is not a correct practice with regards to animals, humans and the environment.
While the fitness check process is still ongoing, today’s Conclusions also demonstrated added impetus for a new Transport Regulation. The Council still “invites the Commission to submit a proposal for a revised regulation on animal welfare during transport, if possible, sooner than indicated in the Farm to Fork Strategy”, which is more than welcome.
At the same time though, the Council stresses the need to prioritise short term improvements and monitoring, in order to improve the implementation of the current Regulation.
While Eurogroup for Animals welcomes short-term improvements to relieve the immense suffering of animals, it believes that the revision of the Transport regulation should introduce a much shorter maximum journey duration for animals as well as a ban on live exports. Such an approach would fit with the objectives of the EU’s Farm to Fork strategy to significantly shorten supply chains.
In this respect, we applaud the German, Dutch and Luxembourgish Ministers who presented a paper stating that these Conclusions can only be considered as short term measures, but want to see live exports ended through the forthcoming legislative revision.
As stated in the Conclusions, “animal welfare during transport is a priority at EU level and should be ensured at all levels and stages of the journey during the international long-distance transport of live animals including to third countries, while favouring, and supporting, as far as possible, the transport of genetic material and meat”.
We trust the European Commission will keep working on the revision of the Transport Regulation and towards phasing out live exports. The shift to meat and carcasses trade is the only way forward to protect animals, people and the environment. The Council Conclusions are simply unwelcome, unhelpful and unnecessary.
In 2018 alone, 685,000 animals came to Israel from Australia and Europe. Photo: imago
World Animals Voice 
