Document type: Written answer to question E-002960/22 from the European Commission
Authors: question: Jiří Pospíšil (PPE). Answer: Ms Kyriakides on behalf of the European Commission
Question: Animal welfare control through the installation of video surveillance systems
On 24 August 2022, Spain became the first EU country to bring into force legislation requiring slaughterhouse operators to install video surveillance systems in areas where live animals are kept, including stunning and bleeding areas. I consider this legislation to be a major step forward in terms of ensuring transparency in the handling of animals. Given that the animal welfare agenda is an important EU policy, I have two questions in this regard:
1. Does the Commission intend to propose an EU-wide regulation on the compulsory installation of video surveillance systems in slaughterhouses?
2. Does the Commission intend to propose an EU-wide regulation on the additional compulsory installation of video surveillance systems in places where animals are kept, including places for insemination, birth and where they are loaded and unloaded from transport trucks?
Answer: 1. The Commission is aware of the Spanish decree on video surveillance in slaughterhouses. The Commission is also informed that other Member States are introducing a similar approach. Several slaughterhouses in the Union have used video surveillance for animal welfare purposes on a voluntary base. In the framework of the Farm to Fork Strategy, the Commission announced the revision of the animal welfare legislation, including on the slaughter of animals. Video surveillance in slaughterhouses may contribute to better enforcement. It will be examined in the context of the revision of the legislation on the protection of animals at the time of killing.
2. The Commission has not been informed of requirements for video surveillance for animal welfare purposes in all places where animals are kept or transported. The Commission would need to collect evidence of the added value of such approach compared to its disadvantages (investment costs, operating costs, time to check, privacy issues, etc.).
At this stage, the Commission does not envisage an all-encompassing requirement for video surveillance for animal welfare purposes.
