EU say no to Polish request for cage ban delay

EU agriculture ministers have rejected a request from Poland to delay the implementation of the ban on conventional laying cages.

The ban is due to come into force on January 1 2012 but the Poles recently submitted a formal submission asking for it to be delayed for five years until January 2017. They argued that imposing the ban in 2012 would lead to a shortage of eggs in the EU and result in lower standard and lower welfare eggs being imported from outside the union.

Poland’s request was discussed at a meeting of the EU’s Agriculture Council on February 22 and was rejected by the council after John Dalli, the European Commissioner for Health and Consumers outlined his objections to the Polish proposal. He told agriculture ministers, "The welfare of farm animals is an intrinsic value of the European Union. Over the past 30 years, EU animal welfare legislation has evolved on the basis of sound scientific knowledge and compromises between economic constraints on producers and the demands of European citizens. The EU is rightly proud of its level of achievement and its widely recognised world leader status as regards the welfare of animals."

The commissioner said that the ban on battery cages, which was adopted in 1999, marked an important milestone in animal welfare within the EU. Proposing a postponement of the ban would be a major step backwards for the welfare of laying hens. It would also seriously undermine the credibility of the European Union to implement its laws.

"Such a move would not be understood by the many producers and retailers who have made the necessary changes to adapt their working practices to match the increased consumer demand for welfare friendly products," he said. "All member states had transitional periods long enough to implement the ban by 1 January 2012. At this late stage, a postponement would only serve to break the positive dynamic created by those member states who have already managed to ban eggs from battery cages. It would also create major confusion and uncertainty throughout the entire sector. Postponing challenging deadlines is not the way forward for the EU."

He said the EU and member states had to focus their efforts on fully implementing the ban. Full advantage should be taken of the existing measures in rural development programmes to help producers meet the required standards on laying hens. And raising consumer awareness of the importance of choosing welfare friendly products should be part of the process being undertaken by the EU. "The Commission has always supported promoting further understanding of this issue, and stands ready to do more in future."

The UK has been pressing for the ban to be implemented as scheduled in January 2012. It is understood that Poland found no support for its proposal from other member states when the Agriculture Council met on February 22. And Defra secretary Hilary Benn emphasised the British position when he addressed the NFU’s annual conference. He said he would keep pressing for the ban to go ahead in 2012.

"We are not backing down on this, but if others do then British egg producers must not be put at a disadvantage for leading the way," he said. "If necessary, eggs from cages that do not meet that date should not be allowed into the UK."

There was similar commitment from the head of animal welfare at the EU Commission, Andrea Gavinelli. He spoke at a workshop session on animal welfare during the NFU conference, and he said there was no way that the EU Commission would modify the January 1 2012 deadline. To do so would undermine trust in the legislative process. He indicated that the EU would take steps to ensure that producers who had invested in upgrading their systems would be rewarded by having a better market for their eggs.

Many in the UK egg industry believe that some EU states will fail to meet the deadline, so Poland’s request to the Agriculture Council did not come as a great shock. Mark Williams, chief executive of the British Egg Industry Council, said, "It was no surprise that some member state had come forward asking for more time because in other countries there are huge difficulties in meeting the directive. At the same time it is no surprise that the Commission is maintaining its current stance. But the figures I have got show very clearly that the EU generally will not be ready by 2012."

The egg industry here has expressed concern that if the ban is delayed, egg producers in the UK and other EU countries who have invested in alternative production systems will face unfair competition from those allowed to continue with battery production. If some countries are allowed extra time, the UK wants to see an intra-EU trade ban enforced, alongside the introduction of a stamping code to distinguish conventional cage eggs from those produced in enriched systems.

The decision of the Agriculture Council was welcomed by Compassion in World Farming, which mobilised opposition to the Polish proposal. The pressure group encouraged supporters to make their feelings known to the UK Government, and CIWF says that 10,000 supporters sent emails to Defra urging Minister Jim Fitzpatrick to oppose any delay in introducing the ban. The organisation has warned, however, that this may not be the last attempt to delay the ban.

"This underscores the need to be vigilant and the threats that remain, even when victories have been gained. Whatever the challenge, Compassion will continue to take decisive action until the day that battery cages are finally banned," said chief executive Philip Lymbery.

In its submission, Poland said that EU figures produced from October 2008 showed just 6.9 per cent of laying hens in enriched cages. In Poland only 99 out of 591 units were using enriched cages.

The submission read: "If the prohibition on using unenriched cages, set forth in Article 5(2) of the above mentioned directive, is imposed with effect from 1 January 2012, the production of eggs by numerous establishments operating not only in Poland, but also in other EU member states may stop. A natural consequence of ceasing production by producers, who will not be able to adjust their farms to the requirements of the above mentioned directive, will be a reduction in the supply of eggs produced in the EU. Thus, it may become necessary to reduce the deficit in egg supply on the EU market by importing eggs from outside the EU. These eggs will be produced without observing restrictive norms on both the welfare of laying hens and the production of fodder ensuring the safety of animal products. As a result, the imported eggs may turn out to be of doubtful quality and the method of their production will be outside the control of the EU countries."

Coincidentally, at about the same time as agriculture ministers were rejecting Poland’s arguments a newspaper in Germany was reporting that the Germans were now relying on egg imports from countries where battery cages were still permitted. Germany introduced the ban on conventional cages earlier than other EU states.

Süddeutsche Zeitung reported that Germans were eating more and more eggs – 214 per head in 2009 – and that the country was unable to keep up with demand. It said that last year Germany imported a total of 4.9 billion eggs. That was half of all the eggs eaten in the country and many of them came from the Netherlands, where 44 per cent of hens lived in cages - a fact not mentioned on the packaging concerned.

In its submission to the Agriculture Council, Poland said that if the conventional cage ban went ahead as planned it would be bad for consumers and bad for EU producers, who would be competing with lower cost producers outside the EU.