Pets report could determine EU decision-making process
Monday, February 22, 2010
The report, on the “animal health requirements applicable to the non-commercial movement of pet animals” has so-far been debated in the Parliament’s Environment Committee without much contentious debate.
The legislation will affect the cross-border transportation of domestic animals, as separate from agricultural animals; specifically cats, dogs and ferrets, which are perceived as a health risk to humans through communicable diseases such as rabies, and are subject to “pet passports”.
However, as this will be the first report to be decided under post-Lisbon Treaty co-decision procedure (laws worked-out between the Parliament and Council), a careful effort has been made to make sure that whatever the outcome of the trialogues (discussions between the Parliament, Council and Commission that form the basis of final legislation under the co-decision procedure) it will work out to the benefit of EU lawmakers.
This seems obvious, except that the Parliament seems split on the issue, with the two main political groups in the Parliament, the centre-right EPP and the left of centre S&D unable to come to a position on their own particular stance.
The whole debate centres around not, as might be expected, the content of the report written by Bairbre de Brúin, but its wider applications. The Rapporteur herself has suggested only three minor amendments to the Commission’s original proposal, all based on technicalities. When the proposal was voted on in parliamentary committee late last year, it was passed 35 votes to 0.
But, what is at stake is the future of EU decision-making. What comes out of the trialogue has serious implications beyond individual political squabbling.
What is at stake is how will future co-decision work, what kind of scrutiny and oversight will the Parliament have on legislative matters assigned to it under the much-heralded Lisbon Treaty?
These are big questions not to be taken lightly.
