Response to interpellation 2023/24:24 on new animal welfare legislation in the EU
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
KD considers that the EU's animal welfare legislation needs to be updated to raise the level of animal welfare, improve animal health and reduce the need for antibiotics 1. KD argues that updated legislation provides better competitive conditions for Swedish producers and that Sweden has extensive animal welfare legislation that must be protected 1 2. KD considers it central that more countries adapt to Swedish rules 3. KD argues that animal welfare is extremely important and that it may be necessary to review technology-hostile legislation to ensure animal welfare 4. S considers that the EU's current legislation is outdated and needs to be changed to meet scientific findings 5.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)
Madam Speaker! Sofia Skönnbrink has asked me what I and the government are doing here and now to prevent the proposal for new animal welfare legislation in the EU from being blocked. Sofia Skönnbrink has further asked me how I and the government will act if an update of the legislation is not implemented and in what way the government in that case shall work to improve the competitive conditions for Swedish farmers.
Madam Speaker! I would like to begin by saying that I completely agree with Sofia Skönnbrink; the review of all of the EU's animal welfare legislation that the European Commission initiated in the Farm to Fork strategy is both urgent and necessary. The level of animal welfare within the EU needs to be raised, and the current legislation needs to be updated.
Strong animal welfare is of crucial importance for good animal health, which in turn reduces the need for antibiotics. Furthermore, we need to address the unequal implementation and the deficiencies in compliance that exist today. It will also contribute to meeting consumers' expectations and provide better competitive conditions for producers and for the entire food chain.
The Commission has announced that the proposal for new legislation will be presented during the autumn. I have recently, in a letter to the Commission, conveyed the importance of the reform not being delayed but implemented within the set timeframe. Furthermore, during the Swedish presidency, an animal welfare conference was organized in Uppsala, with the aim of highlighting animal welfare issues and supporting the Commission's work in the EU review.
Compared with many other countries within and outside the EU, Sweden has extensive and strong animal welfare legislation. We must safeguard that. In order to review the possibilities of balancing the competitive conditions for Swedish food producers while simultaneously maintaining high Swedish animal housing requirements, the government has commissioned an inquiry into strengthened competitiveness and strong animal welfare. That inquiry shall report its work by June 30, 2024, at the latest, and I look forward to reviewing the inquiry's analyses and proposals.
In conclusion, I want to emphasize this: Strengthening animal welfare within the EU is a long-term task in a necessary direction. The need for a stable and sustainable food production, both in Sweden and in Europe, is more important than ever. Updated animal welfare legislation will be one of the key factors in achieving this.
Sofia Skönnbrink (S)
Madam Speaker! I thank the Minister for Rural Affairs for the answer.
There are many things that I love about Sweden and that make me proud to be Swedish. We have our beautiful nature, we have the association life, we have the jointly funded welfare, and not least the unique school meals that give our students the right conditions to succeed in their education.
As a true animal lover, it is always just as fun for me to be able to boast about our strong animal welfare and our low antibiotic use in animal husbandry. We are truly a pioneer country when it comes to animal health issues. And now it is high time that the rest of Europe follows suit.
Madam Speaker! The EU's current animal welfare legislation is outdated and in great need of updating. It needs to be changed so that it can meet the latest scientific findings but also society's expectations. Therefore, it was very pleasing when the EU Commission, as part of the farm-to-fork strategy, was tasked with investigating and presenting proposals for new rules, including for animal keeping, transport and slaughter, but also for the labeling of food. This work has now been ongoing for many years, and the commitment has been very great.
But now it has shown that the long-awaited proposal for a new and updated animal welfare legislation is under threat. When the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, gave her annual speech - state of the union - on September 13, animals were not mentioned at all. And during a hearing of commissioner candidates by the European Parliament's Environment Committee last week, only the protection of animals during transport was mentioned, but none of the other parts of the legislative package were taken up.
Madam Speaker! The risk is therefore great that parts of the proposal will be stopped entirely or that the Commission will present a watered-down proposal for legislation. Vocal critics argue that it is impossible to achieve stricter animal welfare requirements and that it would wipe out all food production in the EU, because they believe it is completely impossible to do better than what is already being done. This is not true.
We know that our Swedish farmers every day deliver food from livestock operations with high animal welfare requirements and with low antibiotic use. Now it is time that we truly stand up for the animals, for our Swedish farmers, but also for all those EU citizens who have been involved in pushing for a change for a very long time.
Madam Speaker! I do not want sows to continue to be fixed or the tails of the piglets to continue to be docked. I also do not want calves and cows to be transported for several days in a row in far too cramped and warm spaces. I want to see healthy and well-cared-for animals throughout Europe and a market where our Swedish farmers meet fair competitive conditions.
I am therefore very pleased to hear that the Minister for Rural Affairs has submitted this letter to the commission to highlight the importance of getting the bill in place. But I am not quite satisfied with that, and I would like to know what further measures the Minister for Rural Affairs and the government plan to take to ensure that this new legislative package is put in place.
Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)
Madam Speaker! Sweden has long pointed out the need to review the EU's animal welfare legislation. Examples of issues that we prioritize from the Swedish side include, among others, that the routine tail docking of pigs shall cease, that the tethering of sows shall gradually cease, and that the animal welfare problems associated with long animal transports shall be resolved. But we also think it is important that specific legislation is introduced for animal categories where such is lacking today, for example for young hens.
As I mentioned before, during the Swedish presidency, we arranged a conference specifically to highlight animal welfare issues. The conference took off from issues and areas that are relevant in the review of animal welfare legislation. At this conference, current animal welfare research and Swedish examples showing the benefits of good animal welfare were also presented. It is clear that it is an incredibly important part of the work and a support from the Swedish presidency to the commission to highlight and discuss these issues, which are of course incredibly important.
I can state that the information that the commission is considering delaying, watering down, or not submitting the legislative proposal at all is unconfirmed. But it would be most unfortunate if the reform were not implemented, and that, of course, for several reasons.
This review is a long-term task in an extremely necessary direction. The need for a stable and sustainable food production, both in Sweden and in Europe, is more important than it has been in a very long time - if not ever. In this whole, good animal welfare is a piece of the puzzle that we cannot do without.
A tightening of the legislation within the EU would not only benefit welfare, even though it is important for our animals, but also the competitive conditions for Swedish food producers, as the interpellator pointed out. For the government, it is a priority to review the possibilities to balance the competitive conditions for our Swedish farmers and for our Swedish food producers, but this shall occur at the same time as we maintain the high-set Swedish animal welfare requirements.
Sweden has a strong animal welfare legislation that covers all animals kept by humans and which aims to ensure good animal protection and promote good animal welfare and respect for animals.
Sofia Skönnbrink (S)
Madam Speaker! I thank Peter Kullgren for the answer.
As he says, this is so far just a talk that is ongoing. But even if it is only the rumor mill that one has heard it from so far, it is probably still alarming that this type of dialogue is being conducted in the EU. We know for certain that this transition for European farmers to catch up with Sweden will take a very long time. I have heard that it will take somewhere between ten and fifteen years. Therefore, it is so important that we now truly get this legislative package in place so that the work with this transition can begin. Our Swedish food producers are, in fact, now living under circumstances that are very tough, where they compete with farmers down in Europe who have completely different conditions and a completely different type of animal husbandry.
The Minister for Rural Affairs pointed out that this updated animal welfare legislation is not only in the animals' interest but will also make the food system fairer, as well as healthier and more sustainable. For our Swedish farmers, as we have both pointed out, it is very important that this legislation is implemented as soon as possible because other European farmers, as I said, are very far behind Sweden.
Madam Speaker! To take an example, our Swedish pig farmers are currently competing with German producers who can sell their meat much more cheaply because their animals live on less area with insufficient or no access at all to bedding material. In Germany, sows are also still systematically immobilized for preventive purposes during pregnancy but also after farrowing. This is something that has been forbidden in Sweden for many years. German pigs are also group-treated with antibiotics, and during castration, it is not necessary to use anesthesia if the castration occurs before the piglet is a week old, not to mention the tail docking that occurs on a regular basis there but which is not necessary in Sweden because our pigs have larger pens and access to straw that they can root around in. These differences are far too large and must be eliminated, both for the animals' best and for our Swedish farmers' best.
Madam Speaker! We know that the added value that Swedish products are known for is valued very highly by our Swedish consumers. A priority issue for us Social Democrats has therefore long been to introduce labeling of origin for meat in restaurants, because we know that many consumers want to be able to make a conscious choice even when they go out to eat and not just when they are at home rolling meatballs.
In government, we tried to get a national legislation regarding that issue, something that was stopped by the current government because they wanted to await the review of the food regulation, which is part of the legislative package we are discussing here today. Now it turns out, however, that even this part risks disappearing.
Madam Speaker! Since Peter Kullgren took office as Minister for Rural Affairs, he has been clear that one of the most important issues for him as minister is to increase the competitiveness of Swedish agriculture. Ensuring that the EU-wide animal welfare legislation is implemented should therefore be very highly prioritized – which we can also hear when we have this dialogue here today. The Minister for Rural Affairs himself has referred to the review earlier here in the chamber, when we met to discuss the use of PMSG in Europe.
If it were to be the case that the worst imaginable happens, that is, that the new legislative package in the EU does not come into place, what will the government and the Minister for Rural Affairs do in that case – beyond the investigation that has been previously mentioned – to stimulate the competitiveness of Swedish agriculture?
Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)
Madam Speaker! We can observe that in many cases, Sweden has more detailed animal welfare requirements than the rest of the EU, at least in the vast majority of countries. This has contributed to our good animal health situation and a reduced need for antibiotics in animal husbandry - but not infrequently, this has occurred at the expense of the competitiveness of Swedish farmers and Swedish livestock keepers.
Some examples where Sweden goes further are requirements for anesthesia for slaughter and castration, a ban on beak trimming, and a ban on tail docking. We also set higher and more detailed requirements in several cases regarding, for example, space. We set higher requirements on access to bedding for pigs, as the interpellor mentioned, as well as the possibility of grazing for dairy cows. Even when it comes to transport, Sweden has stricter rules.
I would nevertheless like to state that Sweden has, in various contexts and forums, emphasized the importance of a comprehensive review. We have also worked actively together with like-minded countries to influence the design of the upcoming legislative proposal. In the middle of September, I also sent, as mentioned, a letter to Commissioner Kyriakides and Commissioner Wojciechowski where I emphasized the importance of the reform not being delayed but being implemented within the set timeframe.
It is clear that even in bilateral meetings, it is in Sweden's interest to highlight this when meeting the right commissioner, and it is clear that it is something I will continue to do. I will continue to speak with those who are like-minded, i.e., those who have the same stance here, so that we maintain the pressure on the Commission. We shall try to get more member states to stand behind this, because it is clear that this is how you increase the pressure somewhere – by more of us thinking the same thing. It is extremely central in all political activity, and it also applies to the activities in the EU.
When it comes to, in case, how and that this perhaps and possibly will not happen, it is difficult to speculate on that. The interpellor asks what we would do if it did not become a review and what we then do for competitiveness, and there the interpellor wants to hear about something other than the investigation. But I intend to continue to refer to the investigation, because we have no proposals presented from there yet.
It is not the investigation itself that is central, but rather the proposals. How much does it affect competitiveness? What effect will the investigation have? That is what we must start with. There is a fairly clear directive regarding what we want to achieve with the investigation, and it is about competitiveness but with maintained high animal welfare. This is an investigation that has been decided upon in accordance with the Tidö Agreement.
In the investigation, however, it is spoken of the EU level and what more we from the Swedish side can do to continue the work so that more shall become more like us when it comes to animal welfare rules and so on. All of this is, of course, central for the Swedish food producers and the Swedish farmers.
Sofia Skönnbrink (S)
Madam Speaker! Thank you for the answer, Minister for Rural Affairs! The reason I want to know what the government and the Minister for Rural Affairs intend to do beyond this investigation, and if there are any plans for what else one could imagine doing, is that it will take another year before the results of the investigation can be presented.
At the same time, we know that farmers in Sweden are currently struggling very much with rising food prices, which means that more people choose the cheapest option – which then often is not Swedish. We also know that extreme weather has led to reduced harvests. And if we are still going to talk about straw, the pig farmers currently have a very big problem getting hold of a sufficient amount.
Madam Speaker! In connection with the investigation, I would also like to take the opportunity to clarify what the Minister for Rural Affairs means by high animal welfare requirements, because I believe that opinions may differ somewhat between us as members of the Swedish Parliament and members of different parties.
This matter regarding straw is an issue that I have chosen to raise in the chamber earlier, in connection with a debate on animal welfare, because the Minister for Rural Affairs, together with Sverigedemokraten Martin Kinnunen, wrote a debate article in Aftonbladet where bedding for pigs was addressed as an action that increases costs for Swedish farmers compared to European farmers. It is those types of statements that make me afraid that Sweden will rather back down when it comes to animal welfare issues if the rest of Europe does not catch up with Sweden.
My final question to the Minister for Rural Affairs is therefore whether the government will begin to fudge the Swedish laws and regulations if the rest of Europe does not catch up with Sweden.
Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)
Madam Speaker! I believe that we are fundamentally in very much agreement on these issues, and it is a strength from the Swedish side that we are generally in agreement. Then I understand that those from the opposition would like to create a conflict, but I do not see that it exists. One grasps at every straw to find some possible crack.
It is like this: Swedish animal welfare - animals' health and well-being - is extremely important for the interpellor, I know, and also for me and the Swedish government. It is also for the government's coalition partner. But one cannot say already now that all rules shall look exactly the same and that it shall be in exactly the same way.
What we are saying is that we shall maintain the level for animal welfare and animal well-being and that we shall have a strong animal protection. But if today we have limitations in the form of legislation that becomes technology-hostile, or if we can find other ways to ensure animal welfare, it is clear that we must look at that. It shall, however, not happen at the expense of animal welfare. It is a very big difference. I cannot promise that there won't be any changes in any detail, but the purpose shall not be – and the goal is in no way – to reduce animal welfare in Sweden.
We must see the opportunities that exist to increase competitiveness, while maintaining high standards for animal welfare. For me, the welfare of the animals is what is important in this. If we then have technical aids that can give us the same results and if it increases the profitability for Swedish farmers, then it is only positive.
I thank you for the debate and the interpellation.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.