It would appear that this amendment vote, while a very positive move, still has to be approved by finance ministers, who seems to have the last say:
(From the article Catherine cited)
"The Parliament’s report will now be sent to the Finance Ministers of the 28 EU Member States, who will have to reach an agreement with the European Parliament with respect to the EU budget for 2016 and whether the budget appropriations may be used to subsidise activities associated with bullfighting."
Given the publicity, it seems likely that ministers will agree to end this subsidy. The main issue, of course, is the terrible suffering caused to bulls during these barbaric spectacles. But it also seems totally inappropriate to finance farming activities which have nothing at all to do with food production, only suffering.
One positive thing about the enlargement of the EU (including Baltic states) is that the new countries do not have a bullfighting history, so are all in favour of its abolition (or at least, ending financial subsidies for bulls to be grown for bullfighting).
(From the article Catherine cited)
"The Parliament’s report will now be sent to the Finance Ministers of the 28 EU Member States, who will have to reach an agreement with the European Parliament with respect to the EU budget for 2016 and whether the budget appropriations may be used to subsidise activities associated with bullfighting."
Given the publicity, it seems likely that ministers will agree to end this subsidy. The main issue, of course, is the terrible suffering caused to bulls during these barbaric spectacles. But it also seems totally inappropriate to finance farming activities which have nothing at all to do with food production, only suffering.
One positive thing about the enlargement of the EU (including Baltic states) is that the new countries do not have a bullfighting history, so are all in favour of its abolition (or at least, ending financial subsidies for bulls to be grown for bullfighting).
