Document type: article published by theOABA
Author: OABA (Organization for the Assistance of Slaughterhouse Animals)
Preview: A direct threat to animal welfare standards
Trade agreements between the European Union and MERCOSUR countries are about to be signed. Concealed behind the economic issues, one key question remains absent from public debate: are we prepared to accept the fact that meat products from systems where animal welfare is not considered will enter the European market without providing any information for consumers? The agreements will open up the European market to meat produced in countries with lower standards, particularly in terms of animal welfare. Intensive farming conditions, long-distance transport, less regulation of slaughter practices - the facts are all documented, yet there is no clear requirement for the transparency that would enable consumers to identify such meat or know how the animals that produced it have been treated.
Organized opacity: a denial of the right to information
At a time when the public is demanding more information and ethical guarantees, the MERCOSUR agreements are creating even greater opacity. Several major retailers have understood this and have announced that they will not buy the imported meat. This sends out a strong signal. But will the food companies adhere to the same ethical standards for processed products? Meanwhile, the French livestock sectors, which are subject to strict rules and controls throughout the supply chain, risk being undermined by lower-cost competition. It is true that there are tools in existence that ensure animal welfare and guarantee accurate information, starting with the Animal Welfare Label, which provides consumers with information on farming, transport and slaughter conditions. But these tools, unless they are made mandatory, cannot function when confronted with the organized opacity of the MERCOSUR agreements.
The question is simple: are we prepared to accept that trade agreements undermine animal welfare requirements and food transparency, to the detriment of animals, farmers, and consumers?
