(Return tabled) Question No. 20 Mr. Alex Atamanenko: With regard to the horse slaughter industry in Canada: (a) what was the reason for the temporary halt, initiated by European Union (EU) officials, to horse meat imports from Canada on October 12, 2012; (b) has Canada participated in talks with EU officials regarding the safety of horse meat from Canada since that time, (i) if so, what topics were discussed, (ii) what conclusions were reached; (c) what restrictions effective in 2013 will be imposed upon the Canadian horse meat industry by the EU, (i) what is the anticipated impact of these restrictions on the frequency and type of drug residue tes ...[+++]ting on horse meat in Canada as well as on the data required on Equine Information Documents (EIDs), (ii) will the restrictions on prohibited/non-permitted drugs be further tightened; (d) is there any oversight by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) on transport drivers and horse meat dealers listed on EIDs as current owners to check for a history of violations of the United States Department of Agriculture, Ministry of Transport, or CFIA transport regulations, (i) does the CFIA enhance its scrutiny of such violators or conduct follow-up investigations on those who have been flagged for violations, (ii) is this information shared with any other inter-connected government agency either in Canada or in the United States; (e) how often do CFIA inspectors do a visual inspection of the transports that arrive at the slaughter plants to ensure that the horses have been transported safely; (f) how many transport violations concerning horse slaughter transportation have been issued to transport drivers within the last five years, (i) how many warnings of violations have been issued, (ii) if the warnings have been ignored, how does the CFIA restrict or prohibit those transport drivers from conducting business in Canada; (g) how often does the CFIA conduct inspections of feedlots and how many warnings or violations were ...

Obviously the revision must be conducted with care: tried and tested practice – including not only the division of the relevant provisions into two directives and the distinctions between service, works and supply contracts but also the classification into A and B services – should not be called into question. The predominantly local nature of the B services justifies the existence of special provisions in their regard. There are, however, grey areas in relation to various types of financial service, and clearer provision is needed, t ...[+++]oo, with regard to the classification of emergency services.

Given that animal welfare is one of the priorities of the Swedish Presidency, and given that countries such as Ireland have already put in place successful animal welfare schemes in relation to the live transportation of animals, including the Suckler Cow Welfare Scheme which helps to ensure that our weanlings for export are stronger and better prepared to cope with the journey, has the Swedish Presidency any plans to take into account schemes such as these for the live export of animals in order to ensure that a ...[+++]balance is reached between the sustainable export of live animals and the safeguarding of animal welfare in any new legislation?

7.4.6 Type of good(s) or property transported/insured/repaired:

This type of movement is regulated by Directive 92/12/EEC which, for tax purposes, makes a distinction between the movement of excise goods by private individuals purchasing excise products for their personal use, and movement for commercial purposes.

The Belgian, Danish, Swedish, Netherlands and Austrian delegations, while open to such an approach, wanted a maximum limit to be set for the transport of animals for slaughter and a ceiling placed on the number of transport stages for other types of animal. The Swedish and Danish delegations in particular emphasised the need for more account to be taken of animal welfare, with animals being slaughtered close to the place of rearing and meat transported instead of animals.