Toelichting bij COM(2023)770 - Bescherming van dieren tijdens het vervoer en daarmee samenhangende activiteiten

Dit is een beperkte versie

U kijkt naar een beperkte versie van dit dossier in de EU Monitor.

dossier COM(2023)770 - Bescherming van dieren tijdens het vervoer en daarmee samenhangende activiteiten.
bron COM(2023)770 EN
datum 07-12-2023
1.CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL

•Reasons for and objectives of the proposal

Inhoudsopgave

1.

Reasons


In the context of the Farm to Fork Strategy 1 , the Commission announced its intention to revise the EU legislation on animal welfare, including on the welfare of animals during transport. This revision is part of the Commission work programme for 2023 2 . The EU animal welfare legislation has been developed since 1974, with the objectives of improving animal welfare and ensuring the smooth functioning of the internal market. The current legislation on the protection of animals during transport was adopted in 2004 (Regulation (EC) No 1/2005 3 , ‘the Transport Regulation’).

The Commission carried out a Fitness Check of the EU animal welfare legislation 4 , which was finalised in 2022. This showed that the opportunities provided by significant developments in science and technology, shifts in societal preferences and increasing sustainability challenges, are not reflected in the current regulation. In addition, current rules are difficult to implement and enforce, which leads to a fragmented and sub-optimal level of animal welfare during transport and an uneven playing field in the EU internal market. The Commission’s evaluation of the EU Strategy on animal welfare (2012-2015) 5 also found that some compliance risks related to animal transport remain.

Several Council Conclusions have consistently highlighted the need for higher animal welfare standards when animals are moved in the context of an economic activity 6 . In particular, the Conclusions on animal welfare 7 of 16 December 2019 emphasise that animal welfare should be ensured during international long-distance transport of live animals including to third countries.

In its Resolution on the Farm to Fork Strategy 8 , the European Parliament underlined ‘the importance of taking into account the latest advances in animal welfare science and responding to public, political and market demands for higher animal welfare standards’. Furthermore, in 2022, further to the report by the EP enquiry committee on animal transport (ANIT committee), the European Parliament adopted its recommendation on the protection of animals during transport with recommendations for the revision of the Transport Regulation 9

In its www.eca.europa.eu/en/Pages/DocItem.aspx?did=47557">Special report from 2018 10 , the European Court of Auditors (ECA) found that weaknesses persist during transport. In January 2023, ECA published a Review on the EU legislation on the welfare of animals during transport 11 where similar concerns were raised.

2.

Objectives


This revision seeks to contribute to sustainable agricultural and food production by ensuring a higher level of animal welfare, and avoiding distortions on the internal market, thereby contributing to a shift towards an economically, environmentally, and socially sustainable food system, as set out in the Farm to Fork strategy. For this reason, this proposal introduces measures which favour slaughter of animals locally, thus replacing transport of live animals with transport of carcasses and meat. In doing so, these measures will help strengthening the principle of short supply chains while protecting animals by preventing long transports to slaughter.

Transports for purposes other than slaughter should be limited as well with an intention to eventually have them replaced as much as possible with transports of embryos, semen and similar which are much more efficient in terms of the numbers of animals transported, as well as environmentally friendly and creating less expenses.

The general objectives of the proposal are to:

–contribute to sustainable agricultural and food production;

–ensure a higher level of animal welfare;

–bring animal welfare requirements closer to the latest scientific evidence;

–address societal demands;

–make rules easier to enforce (including through digitalisation);

–ensure a smooth functioning of the internal market, both for farmed animals and for animals transported for other economic purposes.

More specifically, this revision’s specific objectives are, among others, to:

–reduce animal welfare problems linked to long journeys and repetitive unloading and re-loading linked to several rest periods;

–ensure that animals have more space when transported;

–improve the conditions of transport of vulnerable animals;

–avoid exposing animals to extreme temperatures;

–facilitate enforcement of EU rules on the protection of animals, including trough digitalisation;

–better protect animals exported to non-EU countries;

–better protect cats and dogs transported in connection with an economic activity.

This legislative proposal is adopted at the same time as a legislative proposal on the welfare of dogs and cats and their traceability. The two proposals are coherent with each other.

•Consistency with existing policy provisions in the policy area

The proposal is consistent with EU rules on official controls in agri-food chain 12 . The proposal is also coherent with the Commission proposal to establish rules for the welfare of dogs and cats bred and kept in establishments and improve the traceability of dogs and cats place on the market and supplied in the Union.

•Consistency with other Union policies

The proposal is consistent with the objectives of the European Green Deal and the Farm to Fork Strategy.

The proposal is intended to work in synergy with other EU initiatives and policies affecting both live animals and transport, in particular the EU animal health policy 13 , EU’s rules on driving times, breaks and rest periods for truck drivers 14 , and rules on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes 15 .

The EU’s trade policy also plays a role in promoting higher welfare standards. The proposal includes new and clearer provisions on animal welfare rules applicable for the transport of live animals from a third country into the Union, as well as provisions on animal welfare rules applicable for the transport of live animals from the Union to a third country of destination. In both cases (imports and exports), operators are to ensure that EU animal welfare rules are complied with from the point of departure to the point of destination. A transition period of 5 years is provided in both cases allowing operators to adapt.

Finally, data protection rules (in particular, the General Data Protection Regulation) apply to the provisions on real-time tracking of vehicles.

3.

2.LEGAL BASIS, SUBSIDIARITY AND PROPORTIONALITY


•Legal basis

The legal basis of the proposal is Article 43 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) since it is necessary to eliminate barriers to the transport of live animals affects the internal market of products of animal origin in order to ensure the smooth functioning of market organisations in animals and products of animal origin, while ensuring a high level of protection of animal welfare.

The proposal is also based on Article 114 TFEU since since the proposal also aims at ensuring the smooth functioning of the internal market, not only for animals covered under the CAP but also for other animals, such as cats and dogs, fur animals, certain types of wild animals, and animals used for scientific purposes, thus going beyond agriculture and food production.

•Subsidiarity (for non-exclusive competence)

Animals are often transported across borders and 1.4 billion terrestrial animals are transported each year between EU Member States. The identified animal welfare problems, including their underlying drivers, occur across the EU, albeit to different degrees in different Member States. Finally, the identified animal welfare problems have transboundary consequences including threats to public health, such as antimicrobial resistance. Indeed, as established by EFSA 16 , transport of animals increases the risk of transmitting bacteria resistant to antimicrobials between animals (due to several risk factors, such as contact between animals, the duration of transport, airborne transmission in the vehicle, adverse environmental conditions such as temperature). This increased of spread of AMR among animals has indirect consequences for AMR affecting human.

Action taken at national level is not expected to lead to considerably improved animal welfare and would only partially be able to meet citizens’ concerns. Although the area is already regulated by Regulation 1/2005, thus limiting Member States’ margin to adopt national rules, there remain important divergences in national rules on key aspects (e.g. conditions for transport of vulnerable animals within a Member State, requirements for the export of animals, requirements for the transport of animals by sea), which negatively affect the smooth functioning of the internal market and the level playing field between operators. Continued action at national level would lead to further fragmentation of requirements and increased differences in the levels of animal welfare between Member States. Member States also apply certain provisions and enforce rules differently, thereby also creating obstacles to the smooth functioning of the internal market. Furthermore, national rules cannot apply to cross-border transports from other Member States and therefore, thereby rendering cross-border movements a driver for lower animal welfare standards.

Animal welfare requirements linked to transport at EU level require a harmonised approach and thus can effectively be regulated at EU level. With a homogenous set of rules, this proposal will lead to uniform and clearer requirements for the transport of animals and a better use of available technologies. The revision will thus ensure a level-playing field for operators within the internal market, facilitate intra-EU trade of animals and provide a more efficient regulatory oversight.

Considering these elements, EU action is justified: it would achieve a consistent approach more effectively and efficiently than Member States acting individually and independently.

•Proportionality

The measures proposed strive to balance a high level of animal welfare with the impact on operators concerned. Further conditions on exporting animals to third countries ensure compliance with the provisions of this Regulation until the point of destination in the third country, thus codifying the case law of the European Court of Justice in this regard. Given that the alternative of banning exports of live animals to countries outside the EU would have detrimental effects on the sector, the stricter conditions for export aim to improve their welfare while maintaining the operations economically feasible. Similarly, measures on maximum journey times are designed to keep most transport activities unaffected.

Proportionate mitigation measures to be applied when transporting animals during high or low temperatures will allow transport without hindering the welfare of the animals transported.

This proposal provides for transition periods to allow actors to adapt gradually. For the new rules on maximum journey times, including maximum journey times for unweaned calves, space allowances, exports, imports, minimum age and weight of unweaned calves, and real time tracking, the transition period is set at 5 years. For the new rules on the transport of cats and dogs, the transition period is 3 years.

•Choice of the instrument

Given that the current provisions are laid down in a Regulation, the appropriate instrument to address this amendment is a Regulation.

4.

3.RESULTS OF EX-POST EVALUATIONS, STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATIONS AND IMPACT ASSESSMENTS


•Ex-post evaluations/fitness checks of existing legislation

The EU animal welfare legislation has been subject to a Fitness Check, including on the transport of live animals.

The Fitness Check established that there is a suboptimal level of animal welfare in the EU, and certain distortions to the internal market for farmers and other food business operators. There are still challenges associated with long journeys, transport in extreme temperatures and the transport of vulnerable animals, such as unweaned calves and pregnant animals. In addition, there are practical difficulties to reconcile the species-specific journey times for animals in the Transport Regulation and the driving times under Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 on certain social rules relating to road transports 17 . Furthermore, scientific and technological developments and future sustainability challenges are not properly addressed by current rules.

In May 2022, the Regulatory Scrutiny Board gave a positive opinion on the Fitness Check, with certain recommendations.

•Stakeholder consultations

5.

Overview of the consultation activities


The Commission published in July 2021 an Inception Impact Assessment 18 presenting the policy options to be addressed in the impact assessment. After analysing the 983 contributions received, four campaigns were identified and 525 individual contributions were considered relevant to the protection of animals during transport.

A Public Consultation 19 from October 2021 to January 2022 received almost 60 000 responses on the fitness of the current rules and on how they could be improved.

In addition, the Commission organised a one-day stakeholder conference 20 regarding animal welfare on 9 December 2021 with almost 500 participants.

The Inception Impact Assessment, the public consultation and the stakeholder conference covered different aspects of the ongoing revision of the EU animal welfare legislation, including as regards animal welfare rules during transport.

In the external study supporting the impact assessment, targeted consultation activities have been carried out, including 9 exploratory interviews, a targeted survey with 68 responses analysed, 43 interviews for case studies and further contributions through 2 focus groups and 1 workshop.

Finally, and in the framework of the EU Animal Welfare Platform, a sub-group on the transport of animals was created, comprised of experts from Member States, business organisations, civil society organisations and one independent expert. The Commission organised 10 meetings to discuss the main policy options under consideration for the proposal, the minutes of which are published on the Commission’s website.

Third countries with experience transporting livestock contributed to these consultations.

6.

Main outcomes of the consultation activities


Citizens

Citizens support limiting journey times and banning exports to third countries, especially if animals are intended for slaughter. With regards to vulnerable animals, particularly the unweaned ones, citizens prefer to ban their transport.

Citizens also support specific species requirements.

7.

Animal welfare NGOs


Similarly, animal welfare organisations would like a limit in journey times and a ban of exports to third countries. Some organisations would like a ban on transport altogether. In their views, vulnerable animals should not be transported.

For other animal categories, they support specific species requirements and an upgrade in the use of technological means to achieve a better enforcement. Animal welfare organisations also want a harmonisation of penalties.

8.

Business operators


Business operators (in particular producers) show the lowest support to limiting journey times. Most of business operators are in favour of species-specific requirements rather than a ban on the transport of certain categories of animals.

Operators stress the need for better enforcement rather than new rules and support the use of new technologies for this purpose.

9.

National authorities


Generally, national authorities are not in favour of a total ban of live animal exports, but there is widespread support for the introduction of stricter measures regarding unweaned and other vulnerable animals, as well as for the introduction of maximum journey times.

Regarding new technologies, introducing a digital application at EU level to reduce administrative costs and facilitate data exchange between Member States was generally supported by national authorities.

10.

Consideration of results by the Commission


The results from the consultation activities have been used to inform the challenges faced with the current implementation of the Regulation, but also to inform the policy options and to assess their impacts, for instance when it comes to the impact on operators or the extent to which citizens’ concerns would be addressed.

The evidence gathered from stakeholders also contributed to define the transition periods and to ensure the proportionality of the measures.

•Collection and use of expertise

11.

Methodology used


The Commission sought the expertise of the EFSA, which issued in 2022 five scientific opinions (see recital 4 of the proposal) on the protection of animals during transport on equids, bovines, small ruminants, pigs, domestic birds and rabbits.

The proposal also considered international standards on the protection of animals during transport by sea, by road and by air adopted by World Organisation for Animal Health 21 .

All the relevant audits reports performed by the Commission services were used as well as relevant statistical sources or databases (Eurostat, Trade Control and Expert System (TRACES), etc.).

An external study 22 supporting the impact assessment accompanying the revision of the EU legislation on the welfare of animals during transport was carried out. This study gathered information and data on impacts and costs for stakeholders of the initially proposed measures and options.

In addition, a study 23 on the assessment of the cumulative impacts of the two proposed packages of measures and options was carried out. This study presents the results of a supply chain analysis (performed by an external expert), and a modelling (performed by the Commission’s Joint Research Centre) of the impacts of changes in production costs, as identified in this supply chain analysis, on production levels, consumer prices, exports and imports. The study contains an assessment of the impacts of the two packages on food security and food affordability (performed by the Commission’s Joint Research Centre).

In addition, the studies from two pilot projects, commissioned by Commission on request of the European Parliament, on the transport of unweaned dairy calves 24 and of end-of-career dairy cows 25 , were considered. Also, the Court of Auditors’ review 26 on the transport of live animals in the EU was considered.

Finally, the Commission consulted in 2022 and 2023 the subgroup on transport under the EU Animal Welfare Platform. The Commission also held a number of consultative meetings with various stakeholders affected by the revision.

12.

Summary of advice received and used


EFSA recommendations were taken into account in the proposal, particularly concerning:

–limiting journey times,

–increasing space allowances,

–establishing upper critical temperatures during transport.

The recommendations were modulated in the proposal to ensure the technical and economic feasibility of the changes proposed.

Audit reports and consultations with National Contact Points for the transport of animals provided for information and best practices.

13.

Means used to make the expert advice publicly available


EFSA opinions, international recommendations, audit reports and minutes of discussions with National Contact Points, and with the Animal Welfare Platform subgroup on transport, are all publicly available on the Internet. The two external studies supporting the impact assessment have also been published by the European Commission.

•Impact assessment

The impact assessment addresses six measures: journey times and space allowance, exports to third countries, transport of vulnerable animals, transport in hot temperatures, new technologies for monitoring and controls, and transport of cats and dogs.

The measures satisfy the principle of no significant harm as the implementation of all the measures chosen (limiting journey durations but increasing space allowance for animals within trucks) would overall represent a negligible impact on greenhouse gas emissions (GHG).

In addition, the proposal meets the principle of digital by default as it intends to digitalise certificates and authorisations that under the current Regulation are handled on paper.

14.

Maximum journey times and space allowances during transport


The options assessed in the impact assessment are:

15.

1.maximum journey times of 12 hours for all animals, and revision of rules on space allowance in line with EFSA, or


2.maximum journey times of 9h for animals for slaughter, and 21h (with a minimum 1h rest after 10h) + 24h rest with unloading + 21h (with a minimum 1h rest after 10h) for other animals, and revision of rules on space allowance in line with EFSA.

The impact assessment concludes that the second option is preferred. This option is well articulated with EU rules on social rights of drivers 27 . This proposal reflects this preferred option, providing for a 5 years’ transition period for these measures.

The limitation of journey times will have a high positive impact on animal welfare, both animals transported for slaughter and other reasons. This not only due to the limitation of the journey duration, but also because of the limitation of the frequency of unloading and reloading, which is associated with stress and welfare problems (while today there is no limitations in the number of unloading for a rest of 24h, the new rules will not allow it in the case of animals for slaughter and will allow only one such rest with unloading for animals transported for other purposes). 2.6 million of mammals are transported annually for a duration of over 9 hours for slaughter, and 1 million are transported annually for over 42 hours for other types of journeys between Member States.

As regards animals transported for slaughter, the option is not expected to have major economic impacts since relatively few of journeys above 9 hours are performed in the EU (between 0.3% and 3.4% of animals transported for slaughter across Member States, depending on the species).

Within the EU, the journey times proposed for animals transported for fattening and production would impact 1,4% of bovines and 0.2% of pigs. The journey times proposed for animals transported for breeding would impact between 9% and 16% of cows, goats, pigs and sheep moved between Member States. This is therefore also expected to have limited economic impacts on operators.

Combined with increased space allowances, in trucks, aligned with EFSA opinion, this is expected to bring significant animal welfare benefits, as well as additional costs for transporters due to the necessity to buy additional trucks, as the new rules are expected to result in an increase in the number of transport hours and costs.

On EU level, the yearly net aggregated costs vary depending on the animal species and categories transported, going from EUR 35 million for the transport of laying hens to EUR 1 069 million for the transport of beef cattle. The majority of these costs comes from increased space allowance, and fall on transporters. This aggregate data is linked to the large quantities of food of animal origin produced in the EU (and thus, large number of animals transported). In average it corresponds to an increase of production costs of 1,4 Eurocents per kilo of meat, milk, or eggs produced. The impact on consumer prices, as described below under “overall assessment”, corresponds to an improvement on animal welfare conditions during transport which largely responds to the request of Union citizens, as illustrated by the results of the 2023 Eurobarometer where 83% asked to improve such conditions.

In terms of social impacts, an increase in the number of transports needed would increase the need for drivers. In terms of environmental impacts, while the reduction of journey times reduces emissions, the increases in space allowance leads to an increase in emissions. The impact assessment shows that the combined effect of these measures is a marginal increase in emissions.

16.

Export of live animals


The options assessed in the impact assessment are:

17.

1.a ban on exports of ruminants; or


2.new reinforced rules on import, including rules to ensure that measures on journey times and space allowance are applied until the place of destination, an animal welfare officer on board of vessels, and requiring that vessels are flying a white or grey flag under maritime safety rules.

The impact assessment concludes that the second option is preferred. This proposal reflects this preferred option, and provides for a 5 years’ transition period for these measures.

Exporting under stricter conditions (including rules on maximum journey times for road transports and stricter maritime safety requirements for livestock vessels) would mean significant improvements to animal welfare.

For road transport, while the number of kilometers travelled may be reduced, operators will need to upgrade the trucks to increase space allowance.

Regarding maritime transport, the average cost of training of an animal welfare officer per person per year is estimated to EUR 241. An increase of the enforcement costs associated with the option of upgrading standards for livestock vessels could be expected.

The emissions by trucks and livestock vessels are not expected to vary significantly, as the number of animals transported is not expected to vary significantly.

18.

Transport of unweaned calves


The option examined in the impact assessment consists of two measures for unweaned calves:

1.maximum journey times of 19h for unweaned calves (9h + 1h rest + 9 h), provided that an efficient feeding system exists (transition period of 5 years); and

2.a minimum age of 5 weeks and minimum weight 50kg for transporting unweaned calves (transition period of 2 years).

The impact assessment confirms these two measures in the preferred option. This legislative proposal deviates from this conclusion concerning the duration of the transition period for the minimum age and weight of unweaned calves to be transported, and provides for a transition period of 5 years also in this case. This is to mitigate impacts on dairy farmers who will need to adapt in order to keep the calves longer on farm.

Maximum journey times and minimum age and weight of transported animals would improve the welfare of unweaned calves, considered vulnerable animals especially exposed to welfare and health risks during transport.

Technological developments in establishing an effective system for feeding the calves on the trucks are well advanced, but are not yet in general use, would allow for the transport of calves up to 19 hours (9h drive, 1h rest and feeding, 9h drive). This would mitigate the negative economic impacts of a maximum journey times of 8h in case no effective feeding system is in place, although the three Baltic states would still be impacted, as they are currently the point of departure of long journeys for unweaned calves exceeding 19 hours. A transition period of 5 years is proposed, as Member States impacted by this measure need time to restructure their sector. While the feeding interval would be 9h in all cases, where calves are transported by Ro-Ro vessels (e.g. from Ireland to the continent), the part of the journey spent on the Ro-Ro vessel is not counted in the above-mentioned maximum journey time.

The cost for installing a feeding system in an existing truck is estimated to be between EUR 25 000 – EUR 30 000, while a new truck equipped with such a feeding system is estimated to cost around EUR 500 000. Due to the higher age of the calves, the current three-decked trucks will need to be transformed in two-decked trucks, which will incur limited costs for transporters.

The new requirements are estimated to increase the cost for dairy farmers of keeping the animals longer on farms. However, the selling price of the calves would be higher since they are stronger. An improved health status and reduced mortality of calves upon arrival due to increased resilience is also beneficial for fattening farms. Therefore, overall the impact for is expected to be positive for most farmers.

The option would have a positive environmental impact, since more limited maximum journey times would reduce transport related GHG emissions.

19.

Transport in hot temperatures


The option examined in the impact assessment consists in an approval of transport for long journeys subject to weather forecasts. If the weather forecast is between 25°C and 30°C, only short journeys (max 9 hours) would be allowed during daytime, with access to water for the animals. If weather forecast is higher than 30°C, only animal transport at night (i.e. between 21h00 and 10h00) would be allowed. A transition period of 5 years is foreseen. The impact assessment confirms this as the preferred option, which is also reflected in this proposal.

The option would improve the welfare of the animals as it would allow them to avoid heat stress.

Many Member States today do not approve long journeys when temperatures above 30°C are forecasted, further to recommendations from the Commission. Therefore, the economic impacts of this measure could be expected to be mainly linked to the logistical challenge of transporting animals by night when the daytime temperature is forecast above 30° C, but will provide a uniform rules for such cases in the EU. Transporters will see an increase in their costs due to higher wages for night-time driving but also higher administrative costs when inspections and checks have to be performed during the night. A limited impact is also expected on farmers and slaughterhouses.

No environmental impact is expected. With regards to social impact, workers in the sectors, specifically drivers, slaughterhouse personnel, official veterinarians, may need to perform an increased number of nightshifts which may have an additional impact on labour needs.

20.

New technologies


Two options have been assessed in the impact assessment. The first option is composed of these 2 measures:

21.

1.Real-time positioning of trucks; and


2.A central database and digital application.

The second option consisted of retrospective checks based on trachographs, combined with the central database and digital application referred to above.

The impact assessment concludes that the first option is the preferred option, which is reflected in this proposal. It provides that GPS data of trucks will be communicating with an automated system (the EU central database), itself connected to TRACES so that competent authority can access information about the timing when the truck reached certain points (place of departure, control post, border crossings between Member States, place of destination) so that the competent authorities can carry out official controls based on such information. Since the reduction of maximum journey times is one of the main measures to achieve the animal welfare policy objective, this is necessary to provide Member States’ competent authorities with tools to be able to perform official controls in an effective manner.

Real-time tracking systems will make it possible to better target and perform more efficiently official controls with the help of the central EU database, resulting in improved animal welfare.

Since more than 77% of the current transport trucks are already equipped with a tracking system, the operators’ costs for meeting the new standards would be marginal.

The administrative burden for transporters is expected to decrease substantially with the use of an automated tracking system and IT platform.

The main cost, although limited, would be associated for the Commission to develop modules in the existing TRACES system (see Legislative financial statement). Member States administrations would incur limited costs related to training of staff.

Although digitalisation, reducing the use of paper, is expected to reduce the GHG emissions associated with paper, a small increase in GHG emissions associated with the higher energy use is expected.

A slight positive social impact is expected. While less administrative staff may be needed among the business operators, the number of staff needed in public administration for processing the data collected might increase. For operators, the simplification thanks to digitalization will mean improved working conditions.

22.

Better protection of cats and dogs transported for commercial purposes


The options assessed in the impact assessment are:

23.

1.updated and more specific requirements for the transport of cats and dogs for economic purposes, including temperature conditions and a minimum age of 15 weeks for transport; or


2.updated and more specific requirements for cats and dogs but with a minimum age of 12 weeks for transport.

The impact assessment concludes that the second option is the preferred one, and this is reflected in this legislative proposal, with a 3-year transition period.

The measure would improve the welfare of cats and dogs transported in the context of an economic activity, for which specific provisions are largely missing at present. For instance, a minimum age for being transported will allow for a better development of immunity against infectious diseases.

Regarding economic impacts, additional veterinary health checks of the cats and dogs may cost between EUR 10 and EUR 40 per animal. The economic impact of the new requirements for feeding and watering are expected to be limited, since relatively similar rules apply already. Additional costs for transporters may also be expected, related to the improvement or replacement of their current vehicles to meet the new standards may be expected. A commercially available new dog trailer without air conditioning but properly designed is estimated to cost between EUR 1 000 and EUR 3 000 for two to four dogs.

No significant environmental impacts are expected. Considering social impacts, including on human health, the additional vaccination requirements and the higher age at transport proposed in this measure may result in fewer sick animals after arrival, which would have a positive impact also on human health.

24.

Overall assessment


The impact assessment report also presents the expected cumulative impacts of two packages of options, as well as their impact on international competitiveness, food security, food affordability and distributional effects. This showed that, for measures concerning journey times, space allowance, transport of unweaned calves, hot temperatures and new technologies, the cumulative impact on production costs for the preferred package (package 2) represents at EU level on average an increase in production costs of 1,4 Eurocent per kilo of meat, milk or eggs per year. This increase in cost is expected to take place during the 5-year transition period. The modelling performed showed that the impacts of this limited increase in production cost on production levels, levels of imports, of exports, as well as consumer prices are limited. Consequently, the measures are expected to have very limited impacts on the international competitiveness of EU’s livestock sector. Similarly, no significant impact was identified concerning the availability dimension of food security (with only a marginal reduction in poultry consumption). Concerning food affordability, the modelling shows impacts on consumer prices between 0.06% and 4.37% depending on the commodity. This represents an additional expenditure ranging from EUR 2.81 to EUR 14.09 per person per year, depending on diet and income.

The impact assessment shows that this proposal will contribute to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): it will contribute to SDG 3 “Good health and well-being” as improving animal welfare during transport will contribute to combat AMR in both humans and animals; it will also contribute to SDG 12 “Responsible consumption and production” since producing food with higher animal welfare standards equates to a more responsible production system.

Opinion of the Regulatory Scrutiny Board on the impact assessment:

The impact assessment was submitted to the Regulatory Scrutiny Board for approval on 30 October 2023, and received a positive opinion with reservations on 17 November 2023. The RSB opinion asked to present the analysis of costs and benefits more clearly, to complement the analysis of impacts on competitiveness, distributional impacts in the supply chain, and to clarify the comparison of options. The impact assessment was revised to address these RSB recommendations. In particular, the supply chain analysis was updated to be made more comprehensive and better reflect impacts on producers, and the relation between the supply chain analysis and the analysis of impacts on competitiveness was clarified.

•Regulatory fitness and simplification

Providing more uniform requirements – such as common rules on the maximum journey times – will bring a simplification for the operators, as well as for the competent authorities, compared to the current rules that differ per species and categories of animals. Furthermore, clearer definitions and less use of open norms will make the legislation more efficient and easier to comply with, as business operators no longer need to make their own assessments to decide on the thresholds to use for different provisions to apply.

A greater use of digital tools will simplify the communication between businesses and public authorities. Real-time tracking of vehicles would allow to better plan, target and streamline all official controls on animal transport.

No derogations are foreseen for SMEs as they represent the quasi total of business operators impacted and therefore, their particularities are taken into account already for the selection of the measures and definition of transition periods.

•Fundamental rights

Provisions on real-time positioning of vehicles were designed to ensure that the protection of personal data is safeguarded, in compliance with the General Data Protection Regulation.

25.

4.BUDGETARY IMPLICATIONS


This proposal has the following budgetary implications for the EU budget over the period 2022-2027 of the EU Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF). Details are provided in financial statement attached to this proposal.

Human resources for the implementation of the proposal, the studies, audits, tertiary legislation and international activities: 6,5 full-time equivalents (FTE) per year as from 2026.

Under heading 1 “Contributing to a high level of health and welfare for humans, animals and plants” of the multiannual financial framework: EUR 2,4 million for the period 2024- 2027.

This covers:

One-off costs: Study on modalities for the use of new technologies and digitalization to facilitate the implementation and enforcement of rules on animal welfare during transport: EUR 250.000.

One-off costs: developing module in TRACES: EUR 1.400.000.

Recurring costs: Maintenance of TRACES: EUR 450.000 per year.

26.

One-off cost: Development of digital app: EUR 300.000


27.

5.OTHER ELEMENTS


•Implementation plans and monitoring, evaluation and reporting arrangements

The Commission regularly audits Member States to monitor the extent to which they comply with EU law 28 . The proposal contains an article on the network of liaison bodies in Member States for animal welfare during transport. This network will play an important role to promote a uniform implementation of the new Regulation across the Union.

The Commission designated EU reference centres for animal welfare providing technical assistance for the implementation of the EU animal welfare legislation, including on transport. The Commission also supports continuous training 29 that covers the protection of animals during transport within the Better Training for Safer Food programme. The implementation of the new rules will also be discussed in the EU Animal Welfare Pltform.

All these activities will contribute to the implementation of this revision. In addition, the level of implementation will be visible through new requirements to monitor and report on indicators, primarily using real-time TRACES data in addition to reports from competent authorities. Such a monitoring report on the state of animal welfare in the Union with regards to transport shall be presented 5 years after the date of entry into force of the new Regulation, and at least every 5 years hereafter.

In order to be able to gather robust evidence after the 5 years transition periods, an evaluation report should be presented 10 years after the entry into force of the Regulation.

•Detailed explanation of the specific provisions of the proposal

28.

Chapter I: Subject matter, scope, definitions, and general provisions


This chapter clarifies the scope of application of the proposal, provides for definitions, and includes general requirements applicable to all transport operations.

29.

Chapter II: Organiser and transporter authorisations


This chapter establishes the rules and conditions for authorisation of organisers to arrange the transport of animals and for authorisation of transporters to transport animals.

30.

Chapter III: Means of transport


This chapter provides for the conditions for the approval of road vehicles for transport of animals, that already exist in the present legislation. Transport by air must be carried out by carriers that are members of IATA.

31.

Chapter IV: Obligations prior to departure


This chapter requires journey logs for both long and short journeys. Keepers are to be responsible for the fitness for transport of the animals loaded.

32.

Chapter V: Obligations during transport and at the place of destination


This chapter addresses obligations for transporters during the journey. Assembly centres are also covered.

This chapter provides for the obligation for real-time tracking of road vehicles.

Transporters are also obliged to collect information on the basis of certain indicators, analyse them and take corrective measures to improve welfare of transported animals.

33.

Chapter VI: Conditions for transport of terrestrial animals


This chapter provides for maximum journey times both for animals for slaughter and animals transported for other purposes. Specific maximum journey times are also set out for the transport of unweaned animals.

Journeys under extreme temperatures are limited in time with additional conditions to be met.

34.

Chapter VII: Transport to and from third countries


This chapter includes new rules for the transport of animals to third countries, such as certification for organisers and attestations signed by third country competent authorities prior to a journey by livestock vessel.

Control posts in third countries must comply with equivalent standards to those applicable in the Union.

35.

Chapter VIII: Obligations of competent authorities


This chapter contains provisions on the training and certificates of competence of operators as well as the requirement to designate exit points. The chapter also includes rules on national liaison bodies for transport of animals, as well as on analysis of data gathered on the basis of the indicators referred to in Chapter V.

36.

Chapter IX Sanctions


This chapter contains provisions on sanctions for infringements of the Regulation, including in particular in the case of serious infringements.

37.

Chapter X: Procedural provisions


Chapter XI: Other provisions

This chapter contains provisions on stricter national measures, the creation of a digital app to facilitate implementation and enforcement of the Regulation, as well as a derogation with respect to existing national provisions concerning outermost regions.

Chapter XII: Transitional and final provisions.

This chapter amends Council Regulation (EC) No 1255/97 on control posts, requiring them to be adequately equipped for the relevant species and categories of animals and to have a booking system available to organisers.