WRITTEN QUESTION P-0643/00 by Sergio Berlato (UEN) to the Commission. Avian influenza.
26. 1. 2001 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 26 E/77 (2001/C 26 E/095) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0643/00 by Sergio Berlato (UEN) to the Commission (28 February 2000) Subject: Avian influenza For about a year, the Italian poultry sector has been hit by avian influenza which has brought about a huge and continuing economic crisis and slump in production. The industry, consisting not only of the breeding sector, but also of its offshoots, which employ thousands of people and provide a living for their families, has been brought to its knees because production, processing and marketing in the entire sector have ground to a halt. The only available remedy is that of compensation for direct damage, i. e. for each fowl slaughtered and for the eggs that have to be destroyed. The entire industry is being damaged by the standstill in production, with no hope of aid, as it has always received little in the way of public subsidies from government institutions. The H 7 virus has existed in Italy for approximately a year and it will certainly not be prevented from spreading throughout Europe by destroying the entire poultry sector, which has always guaranteed safety and quality in its production of poultrymeat and eggs. Moreover, the halt in production means that distribution contracts are being lost, and it is liable to create uncertainty for the future of the entire industry. Given the above, can the Commission amend Directive 92/40 (1) of 19 May 1992 in order to establish a fundamental, targeted, controlled and effective vaccination campaign, so that breeding may resume and that such serious problems may be avoided in the future? Can the European Union take appropriate action, also in the form of funding, to tackle this emergency, which is affecting the entire poultry sector in Italy, gearing the action not only towards the repair of the direct damage, but also providing instruments to enable the whole industry to become productive and competitive once again? (1) OJ L 167, 22. 6. 1992, p. 1. Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission (10 April 2000) The Commission has followed with great concern the avian influenza epidemic in Italy. The situation has been discussed and reviewed at each standing veterinary committee since December 1999. Up to mid March, 368 outbreaks have occurred and 15. 2 million birds had to be destroyed. Two Commission missions were carried out in early January and mid February to do on the spot evaluation of the situation. The measures foreseen in Council Directive 92/40/EEC introducing Community measures for the control of avian influenza and additional measures exceeding the provisions of this Directive, which have been implemented by the Italian authorities, were acknowledged and seemed sufficient to prevent the spread of the disease to other Member States. The Italian efforts to eradicate the disease were recognized by the Member States as the number of new outbreaks per week has significantly decreased and the disease remains more or less confined to the previously affected regions. To reinforce the national measures in place Commission Decision 2000/149/EC (1) was adopted on 22 February 2000 in order to implement supplementary requirements for cleaning and disinfection at farm level and for all means of transport involved in the poultry sector, the packaging material for eggs and rules for staff and other people who come into close contact with poultry. C 26 E/78 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 26. 1. 2001 Council Directive 92/40/EEC lays down the Community measures for the control of avian influenza. The provisions of this Directive clearly define the pathogenic agent of the disease and govern the control and eradication measures to be applied in the event of outbreaks. In emergency situations, the measures include the potential use of vaccinations to supplement the main control measures. The main measures are killing the birds showing signs of disease, those suspected of being affected by disease on the infected farm and those in other flocks which have been exposed to infection, as well as movement restrictions on live poultry and poultry products to avoid possible spread of the virus. The responsibility for the implementa- tion of control measures rests with the Member States. This means that a Member State will have to carefully evaluate the disease evolution and the effect of the control measures in place before vaccination is commenced. However the decision to introduce emergency vaccination around an outbreak may be taken by the Member State concerned, following notification to the Commission, provided the fundamental interests of the Community are not jeopardised. Such a decision would be re-examined immediately within the standing veterinary committee. In this context it must be emphasised that vaccination may prevent the clinical signs of disease but not prevent circulation of the field virus. Furthermore this epidemiological situation and the health status of flocks will call for certain movement restrictions on poultry kept in areas where vaccination is being carried out. Concerning financial aid by the Community in the event of an avian influenza epidemic Council Decision 90/424/EEC on expenditure in the veterinary field (2) foresees a Community financial contribution. This financial aid comprises up to 50 % of the Member Stateís costs for the compensation of owners for the destruction of animals, contaminated feedingstuffs and equipment and the cleaning and disinfection of the holdings. The financial contribution from the Community for the eradication of the disease can only be provided on condition that all the control measures are immediately and correctly applied. The specific support will then be decided by the Commission after advice from the standing veterinary committee. With regard to the future of the poultry industry in Italy it is evident that the industry should reassess the advantages and disadvantages of producing poultry in areas with a high concentration of poultry. It has for some time been recognised that in areas of high animal density there are multitudes of potential risk factors hampering the rapid eradication of viral diseases. Unrecognised virus replication in flocks with direct or indirect contact with infected flocks may lead to further spread of virus and new outbreaks within and beyond restricted areas. To avoid major epidemics in the future it is important that contingency plans are well rehearsed, an effective disease awareness is present, movement records are available and that there is a complete participation and dedication of all those engaged in the poultry industry to prevent the spread and to control infectious diseases. This means on the one hand that farmers, veterinarians, catching crews, hauliers of live animals, feed suppliers and others who have close contact with poultry must accept and display a strong self-discipline during their work to ensure that viruses are not spread from farm to farm. On the other hand decision- makers in livestock production and the agri-food industry need to rethink their structures and policy in the light of the current epidemic. Since Council Directive 92/40/EEC was adopted, only sporadic cases have occurred with the exception of the actual epidemic in Northern Italy. Assisted by the scientific committee on animal health and animal welfare the Commission will evaluate the provisions of Council Directive 92/40/EEC and will if necessary, present a proposal to the Council to ensure that the provisions reflect the most recent knowledge available on the epidemiology of avian influenza and the most effective prevailing control measures possible. (1) OJ L 50, 23. 2. 2000. (2) OJ L 224, 18. 8. 1990