The Romanian Extermination Enterprise
Fueled by EU-taxpayers' money?
by Pia Berrend - March 6, 2014 - EU-funding is possible because of the ordinary taxpayer in EU-countries. The engineer from Sweden. The farmer from France. The shopkeeper from Italy. From you... from me!
Our money... this money is used to eradicate rabies from those countries where it is still prevalent. So far... so good!
BUT a condition of a country accepting EU-funds for this purpose is that it enacts a humane, cost-effective stray animal control strategy in accordance with international best practice.
Romania DOES NOT!
Its Neanderthal-reaction to the millions of street animals which have been allowed to breed uncontrolled by previous governments, is not to comply with these requirements. Instead, Romania is in the process of implementing dog population control by way of removing hundreds of thousands of dogs. In other words: killing.
The Methodological Norms (the killing norms) were adopted to fight rabies and protect human health, and killing is NOW taking place across the country. Often this is death by grotesque means. Encouraged by governmental exhortation, this is being enacted in the streets, in shelters, in the fields and in the woodlands.
And YOUR money is supporting this! YOUR money!
The EU have the power to freeze this funding until a humanely compliant strategy is adopted. But will they?
Your voice can decide! Your voice can be heard in the Hallowed Halls of the EU where elections are due in May!
Your voice can ask: "Which of these helpless creatures did MY money kill today? MY money! In MY Europe!"
Our money... this money is used to eradicate rabies from those countries where it is still prevalent. So far... so good!
BUT a condition of a country accepting EU-funds for this purpose is that it enacts a humane, cost-effective stray animal control strategy in accordance with international best practice.
Romania DOES NOT!
Its Neanderthal-reaction to the millions of street animals which have been allowed to breed uncontrolled by previous governments, is not to comply with these requirements. Instead, Romania is in the process of implementing dog population control by way of removing hundreds of thousands of dogs. In other words: killing.
The Methodological Norms (the killing norms) were adopted to fight rabies and protect human health, and killing is NOW taking place across the country. Often this is death by grotesque means. Encouraged by governmental exhortation, this is being enacted in the streets, in shelters, in the fields and in the woodlands.
And YOUR money is supporting this! YOUR money!
The EU have the power to freeze this funding until a humanely compliant strategy is adopted. But will they?
Your voice can decide! Your voice can be heard in the Hallowed Halls of the EU where elections are due in May!
Your voice can ask: "Which of these helpless creatures did MY money kill today? MY money! In MY Europe!"
The EU-Commission, along with the Parliament and the Council, are aware of the continued failure of the Romanian government to find a sustainable and humane solution to the problem of surplus dogs in Romania. The utmost cruelty practiced on a daily basis in various parts of Romania in the name of “euthanasia” of dogs is in flagrant breach of European values and of a number of international obligations binding on Romania.
The inability of the EU Commission, so far, to come up with a credible solution has caused citizens of many EU countries to question the entire justification of the existing EU legal framework. In particular, it goes beyond the limits of imagination of a growing number of EU citizens that Romania, a country receiving millions of euros of financial assistance from other EU countries every year is, at the same time, “entitled” to completely disregard a set of European values. Such values are enshrined in Article 13 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (“TFEU”), acknowledging animals as sentient beings.
By now, it is clear that Romania, an EU Member State, remains unable to solve – in a sustainable and humane fashion – an issue that has been successfully solved in a number of less developed countries.
On 23 January, 2014, 211 European organizations co-signed a letter to the European Commission, drafted by the legal team of the European Communications Team, urging the Commission to finally intervene in the cruel treatment of dogs in Romania.
The letter demonstrates clearly that the European Commission has the legal competence – and a legal duty - to intervene.
According to independent legal research, the EU Commission has legal competence to intervene in the ongoing cruelties directed at Romania’s surplus dog population. The legal competence is not based on animal welfare (ARTICLE 13) ALONE, but IN PARTICULAR ON public health (ARTICLE 168).
Romania’s rabies eradication program is co-financed by the EU. The “control of the population of dogs” was explicitly listed among the measures agreed to be implemented under the program. In fact, in Romania, Article 1 of the recently-adopted Methodological Norms (enabling the culling of the dogs in practice) clarifies as follows:
“The purpose of the present norms is to reduce the number of stray dogs,…, to reduce the occurrence of rabies and other zoonoses, to reduce the risk to human health”.
The Methodological Norms (the killing norms) were adopted to fight rabies and protect human health, and killing is NOW taking place across the country. Often this is death by grotesque means. Encouraged by governmental exhortation, this is being enacted in the streets, in shelters, in the fields and in the woodlands.
The letter demonstrates clearly that the European Commission has the legal competence – and a legal duty - to intervene.
According to independent legal research, the EU Commission has legal competence to intervene in the ongoing cruelties directed at Romania’s surplus dog population. The legal competence is not based on animal welfare (ARTICLE 13) ALONE, but IN PARTICULAR ON public health (ARTICLE 168).
Romania’s rabies eradication program is co-financed by the EU. The “control of the population of dogs” was explicitly listed among the measures agreed to be implemented under the program. In fact, in Romania, Article 1 of the recently-adopted Methodological Norms (enabling the culling of the dogs in practice) clarifies as follows:
“The purpose of the present norms is to reduce the number of stray dogs,…, to reduce the occurrence of rabies and other zoonoses, to reduce the risk to human health”.
The Methodological Norms (the killing norms) were adopted to fight rabies and protect human health, and killing is NOW taking place across the country. Often this is death by grotesque means. Encouraged by governmental exhortation, this is being enacted in the streets, in shelters, in the fields and in the woodlands.
The burden of proof
The burden of proof is on the Commission when it claims that EU funds granted to Romania under other programs are not being used, directly or indirectly, to fund Romania’s large-scale dog management business, enriching private businessmen operating as contractors to local administrations.
This applies notably to the Regional Operational Program, as co-financed by the European Regional Development Fund. Under the Regional Operational Program alone, as co-financed by the European Regional Development Fund, the amount of 3,7 billion euros have been granted to Romania during the period 2007-2013. The total amount invested by the EU into Romania under Cohesion Policy 2007 – 2013 is understood to be approximately 20 billion euros.
To date, the Commission has stated that it is “not aware of misuse of EU funds in relation to the killing of dogs in Romania”. The Commission has also stated that “according to the information received from the managing authority of the 2007-2013 regional program, none of the projects selected for financing include specific objectives related to stray dogs”.
BUT, in view of the millions of euros of public funds that the local authorities in Romania are spending on the Catch & Kill program, how does the Commission explain the origins of the funds?
What measures has the Commission taken in order to ascertain that EU funds granted to local administrations are not, directly or indirectly, being used for dog-related purposes under the pretext of, for instance, enhancing public health, public safety, tourism or employment?
The company names of the private businessmen enriching themselves while operating as contractors to local administrations do not necessarily refer to dogs at all, but often tend to refer to generic consulting services instead. Therefore, the ECT, representing the 211 European organisations who co-signed the letter, urge the Commission to clarify whether (and on which grounds) the Commission continues to exclude the possibility that EU funds may, directly or indirectly, be used to finance the multi-million euro “Catch & Kill” dog management business in Romania.
This applies notably to the Regional Operational Program, as co-financed by the European Regional Development Fund. Under the Regional Operational Program alone, as co-financed by the European Regional Development Fund, the amount of 3,7 billion euros have been granted to Romania during the period 2007-2013. The total amount invested by the EU into Romania under Cohesion Policy 2007 – 2013 is understood to be approximately 20 billion euros.
To date, the Commission has stated that it is “not aware of misuse of EU funds in relation to the killing of dogs in Romania”. The Commission has also stated that “according to the information received from the managing authority of the 2007-2013 regional program, none of the projects selected for financing include specific objectives related to stray dogs”.
BUT, in view of the millions of euros of public funds that the local authorities in Romania are spending on the Catch & Kill program, how does the Commission explain the origins of the funds?
What measures has the Commission taken in order to ascertain that EU funds granted to local administrations are not, directly or indirectly, being used for dog-related purposes under the pretext of, for instance, enhancing public health, public safety, tourism or employment?
The company names of the private businessmen enriching themselves while operating as contractors to local administrations do not necessarily refer to dogs at all, but often tend to refer to generic consulting services instead. Therefore, the ECT, representing the 211 European organisations who co-signed the letter, urge the Commission to clarify whether (and on which grounds) the Commission continues to exclude the possibility that EU funds may, directly or indirectly, be used to finance the multi-million euro “Catch & Kill” dog management business in Romania.
... and the silence
Not only has the Commission not yet responded to the 211 European organisations that have co-signed the ECT-letter, the Commission has also - to date - not yet answered the parliamentary questions that different MEPs have formulated in response to the European Communication Team's letter.
Luxembourgian MEP, Claude Turmes (Dèi Grèng) who appeared on national Luxembourgian TV RTL, in an excellent video-report made by RTL-reporter, Violetta Calderelli, agreed with the European Communications Team's claim that the Romanian stray animal eradication program falls under EU-competence, but that it cannot be that the millions of EU-funds that Romania receives each year to eradicate rabies, would be used to fund such an inhumane and ineffective stray animal population strategy. Mr Turmes agreed also, that the Commission should freeze this funding until Romania enacts a humane, cost-effective stray animal control strategy in accordance with international best practice.
MEP Claude Turmes further said that he had written to the Romanian ambassador in Luxembourg concerning the cruel treatment of dogs in Romania, but that the ambassador had, until then, not yet responded. On 11th of February, 2014, Mr Turmes has also formulated a parliamentary question to the Commission, which at to date still remains unanswered.
Parliamentary questions have also been asked by Finnish MEP Sirpa Pietikäinen (PPE) on 11th of February, 2014. They, too, remain without response till to date.
The asked questions are:
1. Does the Commission agree that it has legal competence to intervene in the issue of Romanian dogs based on EU legislation on Public Health? (If not, why not?)
2. Does Romania’s Rabies Eradication Programme mention dog population control among the measures to be carried out?
3. Does the Commission agree that Romania’s Rabies Eradication Programme should urgently be clarified by way of an explicit condition as follows: Romania must implement long-term measures at the national level for the management of the dog population in accordance with international best practice. In other words, the current “Catch & Kill” policy should be replaced by more efficient and humane measures. (If not, why not?)
4. Does the Commission continue to exclude the possibility that EU funds are, directly or indirectly, being used to finance the multi-million euro “Catch & Kill” dog management business in Romania via local administration budgets? (If so, on what grounds?)
On 17th of February, 2014, the European Communications Team has written to ALL members of the Animal Welfare Intergroup. To date they haven't got any response yet.
That the Commission has not yet replied to the 211 European organizations that have co-signed the ECT- letter only signalizes that they are struggling to find a way out of the mess that they now find themselves in. But why does the Intergroup not respond? Why the silence?
Ignoring things doesn't make them to go away!
Luxembourgian MEP, Claude Turmes (Dèi Grèng) who appeared on national Luxembourgian TV RTL, in an excellent video-report made by RTL-reporter, Violetta Calderelli, agreed with the European Communications Team's claim that the Romanian stray animal eradication program falls under EU-competence, but that it cannot be that the millions of EU-funds that Romania receives each year to eradicate rabies, would be used to fund such an inhumane and ineffective stray animal population strategy. Mr Turmes agreed also, that the Commission should freeze this funding until Romania enacts a humane, cost-effective stray animal control strategy in accordance with international best practice.
MEP Claude Turmes further said that he had written to the Romanian ambassador in Luxembourg concerning the cruel treatment of dogs in Romania, but that the ambassador had, until then, not yet responded. On 11th of February, 2014, Mr Turmes has also formulated a parliamentary question to the Commission, which at to date still remains unanswered.
Parliamentary questions have also been asked by Finnish MEP Sirpa Pietikäinen (PPE) on 11th of February, 2014. They, too, remain without response till to date.
The asked questions are:
1. Does the Commission agree that it has legal competence to intervene in the issue of Romanian dogs based on EU legislation on Public Health? (If not, why not?)
2. Does Romania’s Rabies Eradication Programme mention dog population control among the measures to be carried out?
3. Does the Commission agree that Romania’s Rabies Eradication Programme should urgently be clarified by way of an explicit condition as follows: Romania must implement long-term measures at the national level for the management of the dog population in accordance with international best practice. In other words, the current “Catch & Kill” policy should be replaced by more efficient and humane measures. (If not, why not?)
4. Does the Commission continue to exclude the possibility that EU funds are, directly or indirectly, being used to finance the multi-million euro “Catch & Kill” dog management business in Romania via local administration budgets? (If so, on what grounds?)
On 17th of February, 2014, the European Communications Team has written to ALL members of the Animal Welfare Intergroup. To date they haven't got any response yet.
That the Commission has not yet replied to the 211 European organizations that have co-signed the ECT- letter only signalizes that they are struggling to find a way out of the mess that they now find themselves in. But why does the Intergroup not respond? Why the silence?
Ignoring things doesn't make them to go away!
EU, where are your teeth?
Dr Rita Pal, an independent medical journalist, former psychiatrist and NHS whistleblower who has written already quite a few excellent pieces on the Romanian stray animals issue, wrote in her latest article published in the Huffington Post, where she mentioned also the ECT-letter:
Clearly putting pen to paper is proving extremely challenging. We ask whether the EC is able to determine the meaning of the word "action" in a period when the lights' and cameras' focus is on them. The world is waiting in anticipation to determine whether the Commission has any bite in the land of Count Vlad Dracula.
Pia Berrend
Clearly putting pen to paper is proving extremely challenging. We ask whether the EC is able to determine the meaning of the word "action" in a period when the lights' and cameras' focus is on them. The world is waiting in anticipation to determine whether the Commission has any bite in the land of Count Vlad Dracula.
Pia Berrend