Implementation of the Research Framework Programmes (short presentation)
President
The next item is the report by Maria Da Graça Carvalho, on behalf of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy, on simplifying the implementation of the Research Framework Programmes.
Maria Da Graça Carvalho
Science, education and innovation are the pillars of economic growth and job creation. Europe needs to invest more in science, open up its scientific systems, promote the free movement of researchers, and increase and promote excellence. In fact, today we are seeing an increasingly multi-polar world in all sectors, including science. A few figures are enough to demonstrate this fact: for example, at a global level, 80% of researchers work outside Europe, and 69% of patents are registered outside Europe.
Europe invests less in science and innovation than Japan, South Korea and the US, and this difference is essentially due to investment from the private sector. Our system of science and innovation has weaknesses that need to be overcome, from underfunding to fragmentation, a lack of conditions for developing innovation, and excessive bureaucracy. The European scientific system needs to be more efficient, starting with the simplification of the rules for funding. In this context, I had the honour of being appointed rapporteur for the simplification of the rules for participation in current and future European programmes for science and innovation.
This report may play a vital role in Europe, and it comes at the right time, given that we are beginning the review of the Seventh Framework Programme and the preparations for the eighth programme. As the rapporteur, I decided to open up the debate on this subject and hold a public consultation. I sent out more than 8 000 invitations to a diverse range of bodies. There was an immense number of contributions, which shows the importance that our institutions and the public attach to this subject.
The report proposes the simplification of financial monitoring and control and the strengthening of technical and scientific evaluation by means of peer review based on excellence. The goal of this report is higher risk tolerance, simplifying the bureaucratic monitoring mechanisms and creating greater confidence in the scientific and business community. However, the report marks only the beginning of a process that is not simple. The Commission will be responsible for implementing the recommendations, and it will need monitoring and political support from Parliament and the Council if it is to carry out this task successfully.
In future, the simplification process may be extended to other European programmes, notably, the structural funds. Programmes which have simpler rules will also be more transparent and efficient. I would also like to thank my colleagues, the Belgian Presidency, the Commission and all those who contributed to the public consultation for their assistance. It is imperative to simplify access to funds for research and develop a culture of evaluation based on a partnership of trust between all those involved so as to strengthen research and innovation in Europe, thus making it an attractive place to live, work and be happy.
Ilda Figueiredo
(PT) I would like to begin by congratulating the rapporteur on the work that she has carried out, as the simplification of the implementation of the research framework programmes is necessary, and, as the rapporteur pointed out, this is only one of the many reforms that are needed to improve the financing of research in the EU so that it is more efficient and useful in promoting development and social progress.
The report proposes extending the scope of the Commission's initial proposal, which we think is correct, especially in important aspects such as the financial regulation and the presentation of concrete proposals to simplify the calculation of average staff costs and to abolish time-recording mechanisms, including timesheets. In the same way, it is also important for the Commission to allow the reimbursement of costs incurred after the submission of a proposal, provided it is successful, with the aim of facilitating the participation of industry partners and, in particular, small and medium-sized enterprises.
If science, innovation and education are to be pillars of economic growth and job creation, it is vital to bear in mind the proposals contained in this report and to focus more on science and research.
Jean-Pierre Audy
(FR) Mr President, I would like to thank Mrs Carvalho, who has done a tremendous job, as well as the European Commission. I would also ask you, Commissioner, to convey my thanks to Mrs Geoghegan-Quinn, who has understood this process of simplification and communication. We must simplify the future, but also settle the past. The Commission's auditors should never have applied rules that were stricter than those already approved, and that is why we must settle the past, Commissioner.
We narrowly escaped disaster with research institutes that were suspicious of the European Union. Today, with wisdom and respect for good management, and using tolerable risks of error, but also taking into account independent re-audits, and if that fails - as I proposed, and as was accepted - bringing in an independent mediator, we must regain the confidence of all our research institutes, with proper monitoring and European funding, of course. Then, on the basis of a relationship of trust between Member States and the European Union, we will begin negotiating the next financial perspective in order to better establish the focal point of our research and make it more European.
Marisa Matias
(PT) First of all, I would like to begin by offering my congratulations to Mrs Carvalho for the excellent report that she presented to us here today, and also for the way in which she conducted this process in such a democratic manner, both inside and outside Parliament. I think that this should be recognised, and so I would like to offer her my thanks.
The Seventh Framework Programme is the largest and furthest-reaching programme that we have at a global level in terms of research, and the Commission's proposed simplification is very welcome in that respect. However, the proposal which Parliament is presenting here greatly enhances the Commission's proposal. It does so by recognising that simplification is not enough, by making the clear and crucial distinction between research and innovation, by appreciating the different areas of research, by enhancing its clarity, transparency, participation and democracy, by ensuring equal opportunities in access to available funding, by opting for a model that is less focused on bureaucracy and bureaucratic control and more oriented towards excellence in research, by recognising the importance of the different scientific fields and by advocating that partners are chosen and alliances forged with partners under equal circumstances.
Mr President, I would therefore like to conclude by saying that the implementation of this proposal would result in a clear improvement in working conditions for all researchers in Europe, as well as greater prestige and further improvements for research in Europe. This is why we need to work together.
Seán Kelly
Mr President, an awful lot of the undoubtedly good work done by the European Union is ruined by stories of too much complication, and particularly of people trying to get funding and not being able to access it, despite going to huge efforts such as taking on people full-time for a number of months to make an application, and then not being successful. I have heard a number of stories in this regard.
The same applies to applications for funding under cultural and educational programmes. If we can do one thing, it is to meet the target in 2020 of reducing red tape by 25%. In fact, that target should be raised to a 50% reduction if we can because, as has been said, in application and in auditing, a lot of the good work we have done has been obliterated by stories of difficulties that arose owing to over-complication.
Simplification is the way forward.
Cecilia Malmström
Member of the Commission. - Mr President, I would like to congratulate Mrs Carvalho for this very comprehensive report. She draws attention to major concerns within the field of European research: the question of the complexity of the rules for the beneficiaries and the very heavy administrative burden.
In April this year, the Commission adopted a communication on this subject, presenting a long list of short- and long-term options for simplification. This triggered a very important interinstitutional debate. The Commission is very grateful that Parliament has dealt with this matter with such priority. The Commission is also very grateful that the report supports the majority of the proposals, and even contains some of Parliament's own, which are very interesting.
Similar support was given by the Council and, on the basis of this very broad interinstitutional consensus, we should now turn to action. We are fully committed to achieving simplification and adhering to the simplification principles as stated in your report: simplicity, transparency, legal certainty, consistency, excellence and, as Mr Audy said, a more trust-based approach towards our research institutions is, of course, an important guideline for managing the activities.
Some of the proposals in your report and in the Council conclusions can be implemented within the current framework. The Commission's services are now reaching out for solutions which can be swiftly implemented. We are considering solutions for broadening the acceptance of average cost methodologies, and for a more flexible approach on interest on pre-financing and a lump sum option for the personnel costs of owner-managers of SMEs.
We also take very seriously the concerns on inconsistent interpretation of rules and procedures by the different services when implementing the FP7. We are working intensely on implementing measures that ensure a more uniform interpretation and application of the rules.
We will also work on further reducing delays in providing grants and payments. We must not forget that the more profound changes do require a revision of the Financial Regulation and its implementing rules. Only then can we really remove some of the big constraints.
The current control strategy for research expenditure has been designed to detect and correct errors so as to bring the residual error level down to below 2%. The Commission agrees that this is costly and puts a great administrative burden both on the beneficiaries and on the Commission. So a higher tolerable risk of errors, as supported in your report, could allow the Commission to modulate the control effort, to optimise cost effectiveness and to balance the need for effective control with establishing a more trust-based relationship with researchers.
Thank you very much for the report and to everybody who has been involved with it. It has cleared the ground for very good and important work in the future.
President
The debate is closed.
The vote will take place tomorrow, Thursday, 11 November 2010, at 12:00.
Written statements (Rule 149)
Luís Paulo Alves
Innovation and research are now the critical elements of the new development strategy for our continent: the EU 2020 strategy. Commitment to research and development has a concrete impact on economic activity, since only innovation gives guarantees of future production with strong value added and, therefore, of increasing levels of job creation and the European Union's competitiveness at international level. I have always argued that the regional level is the most appropriate for stimulating research and innovation because it favours universities, public research bodies, large companies, small and medium-sized enterprises, and regional and local public authorities working closely together, specifically as clusters. In my region, the Azores, this fact is visible in the dominance of the oceanic and marine research undertaken by the Department of Oceanography and Fisheries of the University of the Azores. Encouraging innovation at regional level also contributes to attenuating social and regional disparities, making it essential for cohesion policy to continue to contribute to financing these activities in the outermost regions, like the Azores.
Roberta Angelilli
In view of the mid-term review of the Seventh Research Framework Programme and of the preparation of the future rules for the forthcoming framework programme, we need to consider and find solutions to enable us to eliminate certain obstacles that are making it difficult for interested parties to access EU funding.
If we are to create a knowledge- and innovation-based European economy, we need to invest in research, thus enabling SMEs, universities, public research bodies and regional and local authorities to benefit from the financial resources made available by the EU.
However, access to funding in the research sector requires a significant technical capacity and in-depth knowledge of administrative and financial procedures. Yet it is also characterised by a tendency to favour 'results-based' projects, meaning that there is low risk tolerance, which discourages the launch of highly innovative projects.
This situation has the effect of discouraging private sector participation and making the research world little more than a collection of uninteresting projects, thus reducing Europe's competitiveness in the global economy.
I support the proposals made in the report, which call on the European Commission to encourage a 'user-centred' approach to improve access to funding and guidance documents, which should be compiled in a handbook and translated into the EU official languages, and to place more confidence in the scientific and business community.
Ioan Enciu
Research and innovation are two elements forming the basis of the Europe 2020 strategy for boosting competitiveness, promoting sustainable economic growth and creating new jobs. In this context, the implementation of the Seventh Framework Programme for research must be improved, especially by speeding up and simplifying the administrative procedures involved, by shortening waiting times and streamlining application management.
However, I would like to stress that, in respect of the new Member States, the framework programme's shortcomings extend beyond the strictly administrative and management remit. The main problem in these countries is linked to the lack of research infrastructure, making it structurally impossible to access the funds allocated via this programme. Consequently, the Commission should also incorporate in the future proposal on simplification certain specific measures with a view to establishing the development infrastructures in new Member States to provide them with an equal chance of accessing the research programmes.
Edit Herczog
The other day, my fellow Members and I adopted with an overwhelming majority the resolution submitted by Mrs Maria da Graça Carvalho on simplifying the financing rules of the Research Framework Programmes. The resolution takes steps in a very good direction, but even more decisive steps are needed. Our current regulatory system requires such a degree of bureaucratic preparation that it excludes precisely IT initiatives, small and medium-sized companies, and smaller research institutions from among those capable of obtaining funding resources. Thus, financial support does not go to the best researchers but rather to the institutes with the best accountants. Financial oversight appears currently to be unable to handle any risk, and this is intolerable when it comes to research and development, which often involves investments with uncertain outcomes. Risk ought to be managed, not excluded. There are adequate regulatory solutions to this and these must be strictly complied with. However, regulations that are structurally incompatible with the nature of research must be reformed. Another, similarly major deficiency is the geographical asymmetry in the distribution of the research framework programme funds. The opportunity for researchers living in the new Member States to obtain support, as compared to those in the old Member States, is infinitesimal. As long as the aim of the European Union's research framework programme is to provide the opportunity to all European talent to achieve excellence, it cannot allow such differentiation in the programme's implementation.
Richard Seeber
In today's knowledge-based society, expertise has a key role to play, particularly in view of the deepest economic crisis in recent history. Research, development and innovation are extremely important in order to maintain Europe's position as a global economic player as well as its competitiveness. European initiatives for public funding of research programmes are still too bureaucratic and associated with high administrative costs. Simplification of the Seventh Framework Programme (FP7), currently the largest publicly funded programme for research and technological development, is therefore essential in order to create sufficient incentive for scientific research. The research funding should be more trust-based and also more risk-tolerant towards participants in order to allow even projects with a higher risk potential to still seem attractive and to enable the pursuit of cutting edge research.


Financial, economic and social crisis: measures and initiatives to be taken (continuation of debate)
President
We shall now continue the debate on the report by Mrs Berès.
Pervenche Berès
Mr President, at this late hour, I would like to say a big thank you. Thank you to all my colleagues. I will not name them all, but nonetheless I will mention the Chair, the coordinators, the shadow rapporteurs and all those who have contributed to this task.
President-in-Office of the Council, Commissioner, the ball is now in your court. We have made proposals: please take them on board Commissioner. I am glad that you are acting on several of the proposals we have already made. Now, I am asking you for a commitment, the first on a long list in this road map that we have set out: carry out the audit of the public debt of Member States of the European Union. We need this so we know what action to take in the future.
Next, I wish to remind you of the objective of this report which we have drawn up together: the victims of this crisis must not be the ones who pay for it. Our goal is to reassert the sovereignty of politics, the sovereignty of citizens over the markets. That is what democracy is.
(Applause)
Some of you may be wondering: should we not use groups of experts? We have tried to do that. I would say to you: wisdom will come from those who vote, I hope in great numbers, for this report, and who will take its proposals forward so that they may become reality.
President
The debate is closed.
The vote will take place at the end of the debate.
Written statements (Rule 149)
Ivo Belet
With this report, Parliament is sticking its neck out with daring and innovative policy choices. In these days of economic turbulence, Euro-pessimism and Euro-realistic 'no' votes, politics has to dare to swim against the tide. The policy options that currently enjoy the support of a large majority of Members of this House are no pipe dream. They are the result of a year of intensive consultation and negotiations. A clear majority has been obtained in this House for establishing a European Energy Community. For me, that is one of the most important points. Europe must itself utilise a single European energy policy. Specifically, it must draw up a common strategy for renewable sources of energy and cross-border infrastructure. This must represent core business for the EU, as it is the only way to attain our climate targets and to turn around our vulnerable position as a major importer of energy into that of maximum self-sufficiency. Furthermore, it is also massively important that a European Ministry of Finance be developed. This idea is on the table, and it enjoys broad support in Parliament. Then there is the issuing of Eurobonds. To sum up, these are tangible measures that will enable Europe to emerge from the current financial crisis stronger and that are very much of the kind that will guarantee the prosperity of European citizens.
George Sabin Cutaş
A third Member State has felt obliged recently to request aid from the European Union as it was unable to obtain financing. Against the current background of the public debt crisis and a fragile European economy, we need greater political and economic integration. In this respect, I welcome the report drafted on the financial, economic and social crisis, which highlights the importance of relaunching the European project.
To emerge from the stalemate it is in, the European Union must make long-term investments in key areas such as education, research and the road and IT infrastructures. These measures would help boost competitiveness and counteract job losses. We need a standard taxation policy at EU level to encourage these investments. In addition, the creation of bonds to be issued jointly for part of Europe's public debt would automatically reduce the cost of financing in the European Union.
Monika Flašíková Beňová
I would like to begin by expressing my enormous gratitude for what is an absolutely key report. It may mark an historical breakthrough if there is sufficient political will to carry through the recommendations. On the other hand, I do wonder if this impulse to deepen the European project really had to wait for a global crisis. Any measure can be better implemented in more peaceful times. It is often the case, however, that crises create opportunities - and I hope that will be the case here as well. The most urgent issue in today's situation is to maintain the common currency. In this context, we cannot avoid fundamental reform of the EU budget. It was clear more than three decades ago that currency union requires a larger budget than the EU has at present. The budget needs its own sources, and we must take into account the serious long-term implementation of budgetary policies at EU level. The report, of course, contains a whole series of other key steps which, in the long term, should prevent the occurrence of crises such as the present one. The measures to limit capital flows and the emphasis on support for the real economy are important. In my opinion, the stronger role of the UN is a positive move - the EU can be a valid part of a multilateral world. A common Ministry of Finance, Eurobonds, a European Debt Agency - these are all important proposals. Now more than ever, we need political union and economic integration. We need more Europe.
Jiří Havel
The report by Mrs Berès sends out a strong signal for a permanent solution to the current crisis, setting out a whole series of ambitious recommendations. I can agree with the statement by the rapporteur that the crisis caused by large sovereign debts in various Member States has revealed the risks of imbalances within Europe. The EU must act and respond in a unified way by pressing harder for the closer coordination and harmonisation of fiscal policy. I agree with this view, and I also agree with the rapporteur's idea that closer European integration can act as a protective shield against a future crisis. I agree with the rapporteur's opinion that the asymmetrical development of individual euro area member countries must not be allowed to grow more pronounced in the future. The rapporteur makes a very daring call, however, for the creation of a single European Ministry of Finance, the powers of which would include joint administration of debt. This European super-ministry would be able to contribute towards better coordination of economic policy in the euro area and elsewhere. Such a development would mark a revolutionary change, but at this point in time, it is not at all clear whether the Union or the euro area is capable of such a fundamental intellectual and organisational change. At the same time, however, it is already clear that the euro area cannot continue to operate in its existing form after the current crisis, and will require profound reform.
Franz Obermayr
Many of our citizens are disappointed and exasperated by EU policy. It is with some justification that they feel that they are the only ones who are required to suffer the consequences of the crisis. The high-finance sector, which has been rescued using taxpayers' money, is once again making huge profits. Even though it was largely responsible for the crisis, it is not being required to pick up the costs. In order to prevent future crises, those who profit from speculation must be required to pay a solidarity contribution. The EU should play a pioneering role in the introduction of a transaction tax, even though no agreement was reached at the last G20 summit in Toronto. However, fiscal sovereignty must remain with the Member States. Brussels should not be allowed to exploit this situation in order to acquire taxation powers, paving the way for a centralised federal state. What we need is a coordinated approach to the issue of a financial transaction tax between the Member States.
Alfredo Pallone
The crisis has kept the political boundaries intact but not the economic ones. It has also shown us that risk knows no boundaries. Hence, we need a broad and comprehensive approach rather than an ad hoc, case-by-case one. The only solution to be proposed with conviction, therefore, is that of a system of global governance that lays down common rules for all. We can build competitiveness, open up our markets and make them more efficient, but that will not protect us from future crises. No State or financial institution can consider itself safe, even if it is built on solid foundations, because of our interconnected economies. We have increasingly open and common markets, but we also have rules that differ from one State to the next, preventing the control and the supervision that the markets and the citizens are calling for. Common, blanket rules will not hinder the markets. Rather, they will give operators and investors more security and peace of mind. Europe must once again attract investment and manufacturing, and gain recognition as an international model of innovation and growth. Public and private financial institutions must do their best to ensure that the markets work to benefit the real economy and small and medium-sized enterprises. Unity and solidarity are essential if Europe is to successfully overcome the global challenge.
Nikolaos Salavrakos
Mrs Berès's report is balanced and comprehensive and proposes real solutions and mechanisms to combat the financial, economic and social crisis. The fiscal problems which the Member States currently face and the need for important investments and growth call for new financing models, with a combination of public and private funds. I welcome the proposal made in the report to use project bonds in cooperation with the European Investment Bank and the recommendation that Eurobonds should be further investigated, so as to ensure that they benefit all the Member States. I consider that, beyond the common currency, the countries in the euro area should take another step, by making appropriate arrangements to jointly issue bonds and manage part of the Member States' public debt, so as to lay the foundations for more coordinated multilateral supervision which will make the market in the euro area as a whole more attractive.


3. Burma - conduct of elections and the release of opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi
President
The next item is the debate on seven motions for resolutions on Burma - conduct of elections and the release of opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi.
Véronique De Keyser
Madam President, we sometimes have good news, even in emergency situations. I would therefore like everyone to remember the emotion that overcame us when we saw the liberation of Aung San Suu Kyi on the television. It is true that we have a particular link with this remarkable woman, who won one of the first Sakharov Prizes here, in 1990, and who, over 20 or 21 years of her life, spent nearly 15 years in prison. She is the symbol of a political woman who can remain in a tough country like Burma, free and always showing resistance. It is absolutely extraordinary.
However, this event must not make us forget, first of all, that her freedom is fragile. She has already been freed before and then put under house arrest again. Second, let us not forget that the elections that have just taken place in Burma were really a farce, a travesty of democracy. Before the elections, laws were voted in to repress freedom of expression. Some people, such as monks, were prevented from being able to vote. There are still 22 000 prisoners of conscience in Burma today, and it remains one of the worst dictatorships in the world.
We therefore ask the Burmese authorities to respect rights of association and freedom of expression and to free political prisoners, and we trust this remarkable woman, whom we are awaiting in the European Parliament, or whom we will visit if she cannot receive her Sakharov Prize, to maintain a spirit of freedom in this shattered country.
Marietje Schaake
author. - Madam President, on 13 November, less than a week after the disputed national elections had been held, Aung San Suu Kyi was released from house arrest after spending 15 of the last 21 years effectively imprisoned for her pro-democracy thoughts.
As an Iranian woman said in the movie The Green Wave, after being released from Evin prison in Tehran: 'The moment I stepped outside I realised I had just moved from a small prison to a bigger one: that prison is called Iran'.
People should not live in small or big prisons for their thoughts. The EU will see to and encourage further freedoms for all Burmese citizens and remains concerned about Aung San Suu Kyi's wellbeing and safety, as she is being kept under surveillance by state security services.
The welcome move of her release needs to be reflected in further expansions of freedoms to all citizens, which are systematically curbed through the 2008 constitution and the military junta. Elections such as those which took place in Burma this month, even if held in a climate of fear and repression, are often used by regimes to claim legitimacy and to suggest that a democracy is in place. However, any government derives its legitimacy from providing for the wellbeing of its citizens, and democracy is always more than 'one man, one vote'. It is enshrined in democratic institutions, good governance, the rule of law and respect for human rights.
Adam Bielan
Madam President, all those who deluded themselves that the so-called elections organised on 7 November - which were a farce - would bring us closer to democracy in Burma must feel disappointed. It is true that a week after the elections, the Nobel Peace Prize winner, Mrs Aung San Suu Kyi, was released. However, nothing suggests that the same fate will meet the other political prisoners in the country, numbering over two thousand. In fact, several days ago, we received information that the military junta ruling Burma had suspended the publication of a further nine journals, restricting the already limited freedom of speech in that country.
For this reason, further pressure is needed from the international community. First and foremost, the European Union should concentrate on putting pressure on China, as without China, the ruling junta in Burma could not hold on to its power. Finally, I would like to thank Parliament's President, Mr Buzek, for inviting Mrs Aung San Suu Kyi to the Sakharov Prize award ceremony next month in Strasbourg.
Barbara Lochbihler
Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, the images of the Burmese opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi following her release from house arrest are still fresh in our minds. They show a person who is unbowed by years of isolation, leaving us in no doubt that she will continue to campaign for democratic change in her country. Any step in the direction of democratisation and an improvement in the extremely problematical human rights situation is to be welcomed.
However, this is not going to be an easy process. The constitution now in place in Burma, following the undemocratic elections, puts the president above the law and guarantees an amnesty for past human rights violations. This must be criticised in the sharpest terms by the European Union, as must the continued serious human rights violations against ethnic minorities, who are frequently driven from their lands and forced into slave labour, many of their children being recruited as child soldiers.
We must redouble our efforts to bring on board countries that have a significant influence on the government in Burma, such as China and India. We must persuade them to exert their influence in the interests of the people of Burma. They need to implement the undertakings they gave in respect of human rights by ratifying the ASEAN Charter; this charter calls on Member States to take action to combat systematic human rights violations.
Rui Tavares
Madam President, let us begin with the elections. As we know, and as has already been mentioned here in Parliament, the elections have taken place in a climate of fear and intimidation. They were an utter farce and served no purpose other than to give a civilian gloss to the military junta. Many people were barred from voting. Thousands of Burmese - 1 000 according to the very generals of the military junta - have taken refuge in Thailand, where 100 000 Burmese are already living, and where there are now greater risks of armed conflict along the Burmese border. This serves to remind us that while the release of Aung San Suu Kyi obviously fills us with joy and hope now that we will be able to meet this remarkable woman, as has already been mentioned, and receive her here in Parliament, we cannot divert our attention from the most important matter for Burma, namely, the liberation of an entire people and the more than 2 000 political prisoners, along with the lifting of a general climate of intimidation and fear.
The European Union should not, therefore, lower its guard. We need a great deal of focus, of concentration and of stubbornness: we absolutely must not allow ourselves to be complacent. At this juncture, I believe that it is worth saying that certain Member States need to be firmer and, above all, more consistent in advocating human rights. The businesses that many Member States are continuing to maintain in Burma must be brought into line with the EU's human rights commitments. I recall, for instance, that the oil company TOTAL has holdings in Burma that make up 7% of the Burmese junta's budget. Parliament will continue to be focused and united on this issue, and I hope that the Commission and the Member States will also continue to take this approach.
Bernd Posselt
Madam President, speaking for myself and my colleague, Mrs Andrikienė, we are very pleased to learn that our Sakharov laureate has been released. However, we must not forget that there are still at least 2 200 other political prisoners being held in terrible conditions under the Burmese military dictatorship. As was stated earlier, the whole country is like an open prison. That is why we now need to be very critical and vigilant. Was this all just a cosmetic operation or have the brutally manipulated elections exposed the true nature of the regime? We must now use all the mechanisms available to us to press for change. This change can be regarded as an acid test. We must press for our Sakharov laureate to be allowed to travel here in December to collect her prize after a delay of 20 years and for her to be permitted to return to her homeland unmolested. Only then will we have the slightest cause for hope that things are changing for a people who have been suffering under a corrupt socialist dictatorship for decades.
Cristian Dan Preda
Madam President, first of all of course, I, too, want to welcome the release of Aung San Suu Kyi, the opposition leader in Burma, after so many years under house arrest. I would also like to express the hope that this release will be followed by the release of more than 2 000 political prisoners because, as Mr Posselt mentioned, we will otherwise view this as just a token gesture.
I must also tell you that I want us to support Aung San Suu Kyi in rebuilding her party, the National League for Democracy, which was illegally disbanded in May. She certainly has a huge job to do. This is why I believe that international pressure must continue because the military junta has not committed to a process of democratisation, but is going in the exact opposite direction to this process, given that the elections held in November were neither free nor fair. This is why I believe that we must not diminish our focus on this area.
David Martin
on behalf of the S&D Group. - Madam President, I am delighted at the level of European Union unity that has been shown on the matter of Burma. I have read the Council statement, Baroness Ashton's statement and indeed our own President's statement. No one has been fooled by these deeply flawed elections in Burma; everyone has welcomed the release of Aung San Suu Kyi from house arrest; but everyone has also condemned the lack of other freedoms that is still imposed.
However, Madam President, if we play our cards right, these elections could - and it is a big 'could' - be a new start in Burma. If, as other colleagues have said, we can now persuade the junta to release all political prisoners, if we can persuade the junta to allow Aung San Suu Kyi complete freedom, both in terms of movement and in terms of political public statements, and, finally, if the new Burmese parliament and government start to improve human and fundamental rights in the country, and to improve the social and economic conditions of the people of Burma, then perhaps, in a few years time, there will be grounds for our institutions to start negotiating and engaging with the Burmese regime and to see a better future for that country.
Ryszard Czarnecki
Madam President, what has happened is that the authorities have released one very well-known person, as if to show the world that the country is democratic, that it has become a convert to human rights, while behind the façade, there is nothing; no real, concrete changes. We are dealing with a theatre - and thank God that that noble woman regained her freedom. However, behind this theatre lies a tragedy, as we said; several thousand people who are still in prison. The slogan 'release the political prisoners' therefore still stands in Burma.
I think that the message from the most well-known political prisoner in the region, who has just been released, is so important that it radiates across the whole of Asia. It is to her that Chinese dissidents are already appealing. I think this is worth underlining. For this reason, Parliament must fight for human rights and for the freedom of political refugees in the region.
George Sabin Cutaş
(RO) Madam President, the European Parliament already requested in February 2010 the release of Aung San Suu Kyi, who had been living under house arrest since 1990. The Burmese authorities' decision to release her a few months after this vital request was made by MEPs marks a first step in the right direction. However, we cannot regard this particular situation as marking a restoration of human rights in Burma, given that there are numerous pro-democracy activists still in prison.
The Treaty of Lisbon stipulates that the European Union strives to promote peace, its values and the wellbeing of its peoples. We understand common values to mean respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy and human rights. It is the European Union's duty not to restrict itself to promoting these values only within its own territory. This is why I urge a message to be conveyed of solidarity with Burma's citizens who are suffering repression from government authorities and fighting a daily battle for respect for their fundamental rights.
Marc Tarabella
(FR) Madam President, on 7 November, the first elections for 20 years took place in Burma. At a time when we should have been able to rejoice at seeing such a process finally implemented, we are once again forced today to condemn this country, in which there should be human rights and freedom of expression, among other things. Elections must be synonymous with the choice that one expresses through a vote.
How can we speak of choice when the opposition parties are not allowed to speak, when they cannot express themselves freely or accurately represent whole populations?
We are talking once again about Burma here, a country which is not free, but which has been in the hands of the military junta for many, many years. As the whole world knows, this is about a fossilised power which will stay that way as long as no genuine free and fair elections are organised.
The liberation of Aung San Suu Kyi is a step in the right direction. We must recognise it and praise it. Let us hope that it can be followed by other actions, as has been said here previously, particularly with regard to the many other political prisoners.
Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris
(IT) Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, at the moment, we are all still celebrating the release of Aung San Suu Kyi and we all have in our minds the images of the crowd that enthusiastically welcomed her on her return home, where she met children whom she had left when they were little and who are now more than grown up.
It is a time of great enthusiasm, a celebration for the people and the opposition in Burma, but one fact will certainly emerge from all this. Our interlocutor today is undoubtedly the military junta, which can no longer delay explaining whether the release of Aung San Suu Kyi was an act of propaganda, a stalking horse or, conversely, the first step on the way to recognising her right, and therefore the right of all other Burmese political prisoners, to freedom of expression, and a step towards free and democratic elections.
That is what Europe must request and demand. To our delight at Aung San Suu Kyi's release, we must necessarily add a strong request to that effect.
Bogusław Sonik
(PL) Madam President, we all remember the years when Lech Wałęsa was released from prison and when Nelson Mandela was released after so many years. It gave hope; hope for a free world, that all the pressure on those governments had had an effect. The release of the Burmese opposition leader, Mrs San Suu Kyi, is also a great challenge for us. Without the efforts of the international community, without pressure being exerted on the ruling junta in Burma, democracy will not reign there. I remember the times when the leaders of the free world came to Poland during the Communist dictatorship, and all of them, alongside official visits, also visited the leader of the underground movement, Lech Wałęsa. This policy should also be followed now. I am pleased that Mrs Ashton will soon go to Burma and meet Mrs San Suu Kyi. I also hope that a European Parliament delegation will soon be able to speak with her in Burma and Strasbourg.
Janusz Lewandowski
Member of the Commission. - Madam President, like all of us, I would like to pay homage to Aung San Suu Kyi, whose freedom has just been restored. Awarded the Nobel Prize and Parliament's Sakharov Prize, she remains a symbol of fortitude and hope for the better future which the people of her country deserve.
It is essential that Aung San Suu Kyi has unrestricted freedom of movement and speech. It is equally essential that all remaining political prisoners be set free - more than 2 000 of them, according to Mr Posselt and Mr Preda. This would allow for a credible transition to a more inclusive system of government.
Burma/Myanmar has seen elections which were not up to international standards, notably as far as conditions for competing opposition parties were concerned. However, the fact that civil society could partially organise itself politically is welcome, notwithstanding the difficulties. We acknowledge the decision of certain opposition parties not to participate, but also the fact that some other parties, including from ethnic groups, did participate. Their resolve to seize what they saw as an opportunity was commendable.
Elections in themselves do not make a country democratic. Nevertheless, they can offer the opportunity for a new beginning and they do, at least, introduce a degree of pluralism into the system. In spite of the evident flaws, if the elections mark the beginning of a positive process, this will be a welcome development.
We have repeatedly said that the EU was willing to engage with the government in order to use the opportunity of elections to begin a new and positive phase in the history of the country. From now on, we need to observe closely how accountable the new parliament and government will be to society; whether the new institutions will ensure respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms; and whether they will deliver better policies to improve the economic and social situation of the citizens.
To improve the human rights situation in the country, a meaningful dialogue between all stakeholders must be established. Such a dialogue should usher in - apart from the long overdue transition to a civilian, legitimate and accountable system of government - a political system based on the rule of law and on respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. The EU has repeatedly stated that it stands ready to support such a process.
We will continue to use all the means at our disposal - dialogue and engagement, United Nations channels and restrictive measures, but also assistance - to help persuade the new government to improve its record. Human rights aspects are built into our aid programmes. Moreover, we seek links with civil society and parts of the administration and we will try to engage with the government on its responsibilities for attaining the Millennium Development Goals. Promoting our values - namely human rights, development and dialogue - is, and will remain, the cornerstone of our policy.
President
The debate is closed.
Written statements (Rule 149)
Kristiina Ojuland
in writing. - I welcome the release of Aung San Suu Kyi from house arrest by the Burmese authorities. However, we should not ease our stance against the military junta. Instead, we should continue addressing the violations of human rights and civil liberties as vigorously as ever. The fact that there are 2 200 political prisoners lingering in appalling conditions in detention facilities and that the Burmese military is responsible for continuing extrajudicial killings, forced labour, sexual violence and other human rights violations cannot be undone by releasing one political activist, no matter how prominent. Aung San Suu Kyi, recipient of the Sakharov Prize in 1990, has famously asked us to use our liberty to promote theirs. I would like to use this opportunity to call on the EU and its Member States to use its full economic and political influence to speed up the regime transition in Burma.
Jarosław Leszek Wałęsa
in writing. - The situation in Burma has come to a critical juncture. It is important that the European Parliament stays the course with its relations with Burma. We need to focus on the government's treatment of the citizens when 40% of the population belongs to an ethnic minority that was forced to flee to Thailand after the recent election. The release of Aung San Suu Kyi is a positive. However, history has shown us that the Burmese Government has a habit of reverting back to its old ways where any or all opposition is imprisoned. Currently, more than 1 000 'political prisoners' are still being held. The blatant disregard for free elections is a clear indication that the new government has little or no interest in providing a true democracy for the people of Burma. The UN proposal for further dialogue with Burma should be supported by this Parliament and we should continue our efforts to protect all the citizens of Burma from future injustices. It is my belief that our steady vigilance and open dialogue is crucial to the people of Burma and a clear signal of unity among this Parliament and other global organisations must be sent.


Antibiotic resistance (debate)
President
The next item is the debate on the oral question to the Commission on antibiotic resistance, by Paolo De Castro, on behalf of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development - B7-0304/2011).
Paolo De Castro
Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, today we have an important chance to tackle the growing problem of antibiotic resistance in animals responsibly and with commitment. This is a strategic issue for the agriculture sector and, in particular, for the future of the European animal husbandry system.
The data show that around 50% of the antibiotics in Europe are prescribed for animal use. If used properly, antibiotics are a useful tool that helps farmers keep their livestock healthy and productive and safeguard its welfare. Therefore, we are not here to demonise antibiotic use in animal husbandry, but we want to ask the Commission to provide a concrete response for the more efficient and effective use of antibiotics, in order to reduce resistance in animals.
In our resolution of 5 May 2010 on the EU Action Plan for Animal Welfare, this House underlined the link between animal welfare, animal health and public health, and urged the Commission and the Member States to address the difficult problem of antibiotic resistance in animals in a responsible manner. In particular, we called on the Commission to collect and analyse data on the use of all animal health products, including antibiotics, with a view to ensuring the effective use of such products. A year later, the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development, which I have the honour to chair, is here to ask the Commission to implement all relevant initiatives to resolve this long-standing problem, which can also have consequences for human health.
What is needed, Madam President and Commissioner, is a tangible commitment from the Commission that it will use the data collected to put the results obtained into practice, not only encouraging research and monitoring activities, but also ensuring more effective use of antibiotics as an important tool for fighting animal diseases.
On that front, I would point out that some studies show that low-energy animal feed could lead to a higher incidence of diseases and, hence, more antibiotic use. It would therefore be desirable to review the ban on the use of animal meal for non-ruminants, in line with the opinion of the European Scientific Veterinary Committee. These are the requests made in the resolution adopted in the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development on 12 April this year and which will be put to the vote in this Chamber tomorrow.
It has been hard work for the last few months, and for that reason I would like to personally thank Mrs Paulsen, the shadow rapporteurs and all the parliamentary groups for their invaluable contributions to establishing a common text on this issue. The future competitiveness of European animal husbandry may depend on how this problem is managed, and its cross-cutting nature calls for commitment and responsibility, through a coordinated approach and a shared political will.
László Andor
Member of the Commission. - Madam President, first, I would like to emphasise that the Commission is fully aware of, and correspondingly concerned by, the threat to public health posed by antimicrobial resistance (AMR).
In reply to the first question, in 2009, the Commission asked the European Medicines Agency (EMA) to take a lead in collecting comparable data on the use of antimicrobials in animals. The project, the European Surveillance of Veterinary Antimicrobial Consumption (ESVAC), started in the third quarter of 2009. The EMA has worked together with the Member States, EU agencies and relevant stakeholders to develop the system. Findings from the data available from 10 Member States will be published as soon as possible. Twelve additional Member States are voluntarily starting to collect these data. The aim is to broaden the system to cover all EU Member States. A further aim is to have data on a more detailed level - at animal species level, for example.
Why do we need these data? We need them in order to adopt a science-based approach: only on the basis of this type of data can scientists properly assess the true risk of AMR attributed to the use of antimicrobials in animals.
Turning to the second question, I can assure the honourable Members that the Commission is aware that the control of AMR requires a multi-disciplinary approach. Therefore, the Commission consults its own services, Member States' relevant agencies and other stakeholders on an ongoing basis, for example, through meetings and public consultations. The Commission is working on AMR in close collaboration with its relevant agencies, in particular, the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, the European Food Safety Authority, the EMA and the European Union Reference Laboratory for AMR.
In reply to the third and last question, I would like to announce that the Commission is developing a five-year strategy on AMR. This strategy will adopt a holistic approach and will contain concrete proposals for further action to address the issue of AMR in relation to public and animal health. The strategy will be based on the Council conclusions and recommendations on AMR and on the outcome of the consultations I have already mentioned.
Work on the revision of EU rules on veterinary medicinal products and medicated feeding stuffs is ongoing. New tools and instruments to tackle AMR are being considered, for example, as options in the impact assessment.
Based on the evidence gathered, the Commission will decide the details of its legal proposal. Our objective is to present this Commission strategy on 18 November 2011, which will be European Antibiotic Awareness Day.
Elisabeth Jeggle
Madam President, Mr Andor, firstly, I would like to thank the chair of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development, Mr De Castro, for his initiative and for the question to the Commission on this important issue. Mr Andor, after listening to your speech, I would first of all like to ask you to move from theory to practice, because we need to take concrete action.
Antibiotic resistance is a subject which we must take seriously and which, hitherto, has had too little attention paid to it in the context of animal husbandry. Antimicrobial agents are undoubtedly very useful when properly used. They help farmers to keep their animals healthy and productive and also ensure high levels of animal welfare. In order to make sure that antibiotics remain effective in combating disease in animals and in humans, we must take a coordinated approach at an EU level.
In recent weeks, we have held intensive discussions on this subject in the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development and we have considered it in detail. The joint resolution was adopted by the committee on 12 April with a large majority: 34 votes in favour and 2 against. The excellent cooperation with all the shadow rapporteurs from the different groups has resulted in a very balanced and well thought-out text, which we must adhere to, and I would ask you to do so, during the vote in plenary tomorrow. The report is balanced because it focuses on animal welfare, the problems of antibiotic resistance and cost-effectiveness as far as the farms are concerned.
Therefore, I would once again like to thank everyone involved in the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development and also Mrs Paulsen for the fruitful cooperation. I would now like to see the Commission take action.
Luis Manuel Capoulas Santos
Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the consequences of using antibiotics to treat animal diseases are well known and increasingly worrying. It is an area that is already subject to fairly demanding standards, to which the European Parliament has also been dedicating attention, and on which many positive initiatives are being realised, such as the network for collecting data on antibiotic resistance. However, these initiatives are still not enough.
I therefore call on the Commission not just to improve the monitoring mechanisms, but also to adopt the measures necessary for wider-ranging data collection, and for the series of incentives encouraging best practices in this area to be included in the common agricultural policy legislative package that is being drawn up.
The text of the resolution tabled by the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development, whose most important recommendations received broad support, as my colleague, Mrs Jeggle, has just confirmed, deserves detailed analysis by the Commission. Above all, the recommendations need to be translated into concrete measures to better defend public health and the image of the quality of European products of animal origin.
Marit Paulsen
Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I think that we have done a fantastic job in the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development. It is rare for a politically mixed gathering to be as much in agreement as we were this time.
Antibiotic resistance is, in fact, the biggest threat to both animal and human health that we face. At one time, infectious diseases were the most common cause of death in children, young people and young animals. In this regard, do not forget that both animals and people are mammals. We have the same immune defences and we have the same sensitivity to stress, which means that if we do not feel well, our immune defences are impaired and we need antibiotics because we will be more susceptible to serious infections.
We considered this with regard to human medicine. We took measures, we tried to tighten up our use of antibiotics and to understand what could happen. Do not forget that if we lose antibiotics as a weapon, we will be back to the time of our great grandmothers when what we currently think of as trivial infectious diseases, such as a small child's ear inflammation, could once again become fatal diseases. This is not something that is particularly easy to deal with in this respect and we should be taking it seriously. As I said, I am extremely pleased.
There are, of course, some details of this resolution that I would have liked to have more of or that I would have liked to be different, but the main thing is not that all of the commas are in place; what is important is our collective will to start the process. That is what I hope the Commission will take on board, because I believe that we will get an almost unanimous 'yes' tomorrow. I hope so, and I hope that this will be a strong signal that makes you sit up and listen. Thank you.
Richard Ashworth
on behalf of the ECR Group. - Madam President, I would like to thank the Chair of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development for bringing this issue up.
I share his concerns at the level of antibiotic resistance being found in bacterial infections of livestock. I agree with him that there should be growing concern that there is evidence of overspill to the human population, where we are finding that the efficacy of many once-reliable antibiotics has declined significantly, thereby putting human health at risk. So I support the intent of the debate. I also agree that the important first step must be to work closely with the various agencies and the pharmaceutical industry in order to monitor and assess the problem.
I want to state, however, that, contrary to popular opinion, this is not exclusively a problem brought about by intensive agriculture. The random use of antibiotics in agriculture is - or has been - common to all farming, be it large or small. Indeed, I would go further and say that large-scale producers today are usually vertically integrated under contractual terms with the processing sector, and that the prophylactic use of antibiotics is usually prohibited or restricted under quality assurance schemes.
However, it is clear that there must be some measure of control, and I look forward to hearing details of the Commissioner's strategy in due course. There are three points that I want to make. Firstly, any measures taken must be based on sound scientific evidence; secondly, they must be proportionate; and, thirdly, they should not place a further burden of regulation, and thereby cost, on the agricultural and veterinary industries.
Martin Häusling
Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, this is a very serious issue. It is of great importance not only for animal husbandry in future, but also primarily for human health. We must not forget this. This is ultimately not a problem for the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development. However, as has once again become clear, we do not have enough data. Only 10 Member States have provided information and that is too few. We need to deal with this subject rather more quickly and we need accurate controls.
We are paying too little attention to one factor in this context and that is intensive farming, both in large-scale buildings and in certain regions. We need to look at this and we can do something to prevent it. By restructuring our agricultural policy, we can make sure that the focus is on good animal welfare, that animals live in conditions suitable for their species, and that the animals are strong and robust, on the principle that prevention is better than cure.
What we also need, and this is a job for the Commission, is a long-term plan to reduce the use of antibiotics in agriculture. The main impact of antibiotic resistance is on workers in the agriculture industry, in other words, farmers and their employees. These people already have huge problems in this area. Another cause for concern is the suspicion that antibiotic resistance is being transferred directly via foodstuffs. We need to look carefully at this in the interests of the health of the European population. There is an urgent need for action here.
It is important to make it clear that 50% of all antibiotics are used in animal husbandry, which is far too much. Therefore, we must ensure that this figure is reduced in the long-term interests of agriculture and of public health.
Rareş-Lucian Niculescu
(RO) Madam President, World Health Day, celebrated on 7 April, had as its theme this year antibiotic resistance, regarded as a global threat to public health. Every year, 25 000 people die across Europe from causes associated with antimicrobial resistance. Animals and food of animal origin could play a role in the development of antimicrobial resistance in people. This is why the resolution being debated today is an important document.
The most important word in any discussion on this subject is 'caution'. It is not antibiotics which are bad, but their uncalculated and immoderate use is dangerous. Antibiotics must not be demonised, but used with caution in both people and animals. The measures proposed by this resolution on providing more information to vets and farmers must therefore be implemented as vigorously as possible. With regard to imposing a ban on the use of antibiotics as additives in animal feed, this must be subject without fail to international agreement.
A recent study highlights that in the United States, almost half of the samples of meat tested in stores contained Staphylococcus aureus, half of which were resistant to at least three classes of antibiotics. This demonstrates the widespread use of antibiotics in animal husbandry, and I must say that European farmers have had enough of being the only ones to adopt and comply with the rules at the risk of a drop in their incomes.
Ulrike Rodust
(DE) Madam President, Mr Andor, ladies and gentlemen, we must do everything we can to counteract the spread of antibiotic resistance. We are in complete agreement on this. This involves the responsible use of antibiotics in human medicine and in animal husbandry. The European Union must take determined action. We must not allow 25 000 people to go on dying from infections caused by resistant bacteria every year in the European Union alone. Antibiotics must not be used routinely or preventively. We must ensure that antibiotics are used responsibly in all the Member States.
It is of the utmost importance that every possible effort is made to keep livestock healthy from the rearing stage onwards, until they are fully grown. Ensuring that animals are healthy is the best means of avoiding infection and the use of antibiotics. The way the animals are fed is decisive in this respect, but the husbandry is also important.
We should also be open to the use of alternative methods, such as homeopathy and phytotherapy, in livestock husbandry. We need more research and more information in Europe about these alternative approaches.
Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy
(NL) Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, my home country, the Netherlands, is champion of the world. Not at football, alas - we just missed out on that last year - but in the use of antibiotics in cattle breeding. No other country in the world uses as many antibiotics in cattle breeding as the Netherlands. There are very serious consequences to this, and they are not limited to this usage in the Netherlands; 25 000 people die as a result of bacterial infections in Europe every year, as other Members have said. They reach people via meat. 90% of the chicken meat in the Netherlands contains resistant ESBL bacteria, and last month, it even came to light that resistant bacteria had been found in vegetables after being passed on via manure and the soil. Madam President, this really has to change. A country like Denmark has shown that things can change and that, with sound, strict measures, you can maintain a strong and healthy cattle-breeding sector whilst using far fewer antibiotics.
The Commission has stated previously, and again this evening, that it will put forward more far-reaching measures in November. They will then be fleshed out in 2012. I want to urge the Commission to really give this a high priority and not allow it to depend on the Member States, which are too slow to put the right measures in place.
Mairead McGuinness
Madam President, it is very clear that there is cross-party agreement on concern around antibiotic resistance. However, given what the Commission has just said - that we have data from 10 Member States and that it is not yet available to us - we really are talking about concerns about which we do not have detailed facts. We need that information.
I would like to see a league table of Member States' usage of drugs per head of animal population, so that we can actually look at countries which adopt best practice and benchmark them against others that are not. I do not mean to point the finger, but rather to allow those Member States who might be overusing antibiotics to improve their animal husbandry practices.
It is also right to say that farmers do not use antibiotics willy-nilly; they use them when animals are sick. Antibiotics are costly and therefore, farmers do not just use them as they would give an animal a drink of water.
We need to be a bit balanced in this debate. Let us get the information. We look forward to the strategy in November to help us avoid this growing problem for the European Union and its animal and human population.
Peter Jahr
(DE) Madam President, I am very grateful to the author of the question, the chair of our committee, for putting this subject on the agenda. The use of antibiotics in animals involves closely linked advantages and disadvantages. The medicines which help animals to remain healthy can, if used improperly, represent a major risk for people. Therefore, we need to take a coordinated, integrated and, above all, scientific approach, because we will have to continue using antibiotics to treat animals in future. At the same time, we must also reduce the risks for people.
This report meets precisely these requirements. I hope that the Commission will take up Parliament's suggestions, wishes and demands. Most importantly, as many previous speakers have said, we need an analysis of the current situation by all the Member States in the interest of animals, of European agriculture and, in particular, of the citizens of the European Union.
Miroslav Mikolášik
(SK) Madam President, I would like to point out one fact which links veterinary medicine to human medicine. All other European congresses of microbiologists, when they spoke of resistance to antibiotics in humans, spoke of the so-called methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus. This is a scourge for which those of us in human medicine no longer have an effective antibiotic: we do not know how to cure it. Up to 25 000 people die from it every year.
Do you know how it came into being? Simply through the irresponsible use of antibiotics in veterinary medicine. Tonnes of antibiotics are literally stuffed into animals. In the case of animals that are dosed preventively, it is added to their food, and it thus also weakens man and his ability to combat the infections he gets, despite being in hospital, through hospital strains.
I would like to urge the Commission to speed up the gathering of research from all Member States, but also to support new research into antibiotics that would be effective for humans and would save lives.
Jaroslav Paška
(SK) Madam President, the penetration of the food chain by products from the chemical and pharmaceutical industry is an inevitable consequence of the intensification of agricultural output. The human organism thus becomes the natural victim of the efforts of food producers to produce as much food as possible, as cheaply and as efficiently as possible.
We must therefore start to monitor the use of modern chemicals and pharmaceuticals in agriculture very closely and, in the interests of protecting the health of our citizens, also assess very purposefully, systematically and permanently the consequences of using these substances. Only the high quality permanent monitoring of food products will enable us to recognise early on the risks or threats which new technologies pose to the current population.
We may be talking today more about antibiotics and the growing resistance to them, but we must take note of the issue and assess it more comprehensively. I also hope that the Commission will regard concern for food safety as a coherent strategy.
László Andor
Member of the Commission. - Madam President, the Commission strategy on antimicrobial resistance (AMR), which we plan to present in November, will provide further ideas on how the Commission, together with the Member States and stakeholders, could tackle AMR in all sectors involved. Some of these actions may require changes in legislation. Others may not. The key is to select the right tools for the task in hand.
I fully agree with you that this is not only, or chiefly, an animal farming issue. This is why our aim is to reduce the development of antimicrobial resistance attributed to the use of antimicrobials in animals.
There are various tools here: education, awareness-raising campaigns and so on. By the same token, we believe that data has to be collected to promote better understanding of the problem. The Member States do actually show interest in providing data, which is encouraging.
And yes, we do have a timetable for action. Preparatory work is ongoing, including impact assessment, the revision of rules on veterinary medical products and so on. Legislative proposals, as I already mentioned, will follow in 2012.
The Commission very much welcomes the valuable input of Parliament and looks forward to continued collaboration with Parliament, Member States and stakeholders from all sectors, with the common aim of protecting the health of citizens throughout the European Union.
President
To conclude the debate, I have received one motion for a resolution.
The debate is closed.
The vote will take place on Thursday, 12 May, at noon.
Written statements (Rule 149)
Luís Paulo Alves
Antibiotic resistance in livestock and domestic animals has become a problem in recent years. In order to tackle this growing problem, I call for increased research and better controls on its effects in the food chain. If used correctly, antibiotics are an effective tool, but I call on the Commission to introduce concrete measures to make their use more efficient so as to reduce animals' resistance to antibiotics, as this is a problem that impacts on the entire food chain. It particularly affects levels of antibiotic resistance and so has human health repercussions. To achieve this, the budget for the Food and Veterinary Office (FVO) and the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) must include the funds required to increase field work and to effectively monitor this problem. Finally, given the importance of this problem, I call on the Commission to draw up a plan for tackling it at EU level that takes into account the full extent of this problem of combating antibiotic resistance, above all, the link between animal health and antibiotic use, and the link between animal and human health.
Ismail Ertug
We are absorbing antibiotics in our food, which is resulting in increased resistance. This is one area of medical progress which is gradually being ruined and we have known about this for a long time. Mr De Castro referred to the measures that have already been taken. I support the proposals made in the resolution. There are two aspects of this which I would like to focus on.
Regulations alone are not enough. In the dioxin scandal, we have seen how easily they can be undermined, if individual 'black sheep' behave in a very negligent way. Of course, we must have regulations and we need to introduce monitoring systems, but that is not the entire solution.
In the medium and long term, the solution is to make the use of antibiotics largely superfluous. We can achieve this firstly by investing in research and networking expert knowledge, secondly, by passing this knowledge on to farmers and vets and thirdly, by providing information to consumers.
We must make clever use of market forces, because it is consumers who decide in the long term how their food is produced.
Pavel Poc
According to the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, there are 400 000 patients in Europe infected with multi-resistant strains of bacteria. I therefore welcome the resolution of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development, in which I support, above all, the demand for the proper collection and analysis of comparable data on the sale of preparations for veterinary use, and the subsequent use of these preparations on animals. The collection of this data should be mandatory for all EU Member States. If the EU adopts strict measures on the use of antibiotics with agricultural animals, we can also expect changes to legislation in third countries, particularly because of the financial losses that would be caused by a restriction on meat exports to Europe. For example, 74% of all antibiotics used in the US are applied in animal husbandry, for preventing diseases or boosting the growth of healthy animals. Half of all meat products inspected in shops in the US contain dangerous bacteria (MRSA). This problem has been known in the US since 2008, and there has been no fundamental solution to date. Non-pathogenic multi-resistant strains of bacteria also represent a risk in view of the possibility of transgenic transfers and, according to the latest research, shared resistance. The emergence of new, multi-resistant strains of bacteria may deprive future generations of the possibility of making effective use of antibiotics. A scenario such as this could have catastrophic consequences for human health. Resistance to antibiotics represents an enormously serious problem which must be resolved immediately and effectively.