| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Scrapie
Mr. Baker: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what scientific evidence underlay his Department's policy of forbidding the burial by farmers of sheep which died of scrapie. [104]
Mr. Rooker: This Department has not introduced a policy of forbidding farmers from burying the carcases of sheep which die from scrapie except in the case of heads which are sent to Veterinary Investigation Centres for diagnostic purposes. These carcases must be disposed of in accordance with the Animal By-Products Order 1992 (as amended) and, where on-farm burial takes place, guidance is provided to farmers in the Code of Good Agricultural Practice for the Protection of Water.
Set-aside Land
Mr. Gordon Prentice:
To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what area of agricultural
21 May 1997 : Column: 100
land in (a) Lancashire and (b) North Yorkshire is currently subject to set aside under the common agricultural policy. [706]
Mr. Rooker:
The information requested is not available at present. Most farmers have only recently submitted their 1997 IACS applications which detail the areas they have set aside. Once the applications have been processed I will write to my hon. Friend with the information requested.
Mrs. Helen Jackson:
To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will list for each rendering firm, the amounts due to them under the rendering industry support scheme for each year in the period 1995 to 2000. [614]
Mr. Rooker:
Rendering industry support schemes have been introduced for 1996-97 and 1997-98. Total expenditure for 1996-97 is estimated at about £100 million, with a provision of up to £59 million for 1997-98. As at 21 May about £90 million had been paid to renderers for 1996-97. No money had yet been paid in respect of 1997-98.
Individual companies' entitlements to support for the whole of 1996-97 have yet to be finally determined. Under the 1997-98 scheme, support payments depend on eligible renderers' production profile during the year. Entitlements for the year as a whole will therefore not be known until after the scheme ends.
I am unable to disclose information about the support which has to date been paid to individual renderers for reasons of their commercial confidentiality (exemption 13 in the Code of Practice on Access to Government Information).
Mr. Campbell-Savours:
To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will list each occasion on which issues relating to the safety of food have been referred to Ministers in the last five years. [39]
Mr. Rooker:
Issues relating to the safety of food are a significant part of the work of the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, and Ministers are consulted regularly on these matters. My hon. Friend's question is so wide-ranging that a detailed reply could only be given at disproportionate cost.
I can inform my hon. Friend that food safety issues have been considered by Ministers each day since the Government took office.
Mr. Campbell-Savours:
To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what assessment he has made of the current manpower resources available to ensure that food hygiene standards are adequately maintained. [41]
Mr. Rooker:
This is one of the areas we shall be considering as we take forward the proposals to establish a Food Standards Agency.
21 May 1997 : Column: 101
Mr. Campbell-Savours:
To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how many veterinarians have been dismissed for failure to ensure compliance with health inspection regulations over the last 36 months. [13]
Mr. Rooker:
The Meat Hygiene Service was established as an Executive Agency of MAFF on 1 April 1995 and took over responsibility from local authorities for meat hygiene and inspection in licensed fresh meat premises.
Operational and staffing matters are the responsibility of the Meat Hygiene Service and I have asked the Chief executive to reply to my hon. Friend.
Letter from Johnston McNeill to Mr. Dale Campbell-Savours, dated 21 May 1997:
21 May 1997 : Column: 102
Mr. Rooker:
This is one of the areas we shall be considering as we take forward the proposals to establish a Food Standards Agency. In his report, Professor Philip James states that the Food Safety Act 1990, which provides the framework for food legislation, is generally acknowledged to be a good tool for ensuring food safety.
Mr. Campbell-Savours:
To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what assessment he has made of the adequacy of the budget allocated for food safety in his Department relative to the responsibilities and liabilities placed on his Department arising from (a) BSE and (b) other food safety issues; and if he will make a statement. [45]
Mr. Rooker:
The Ministry's spending priorities and the budgets allocated to them are about to undergo a thorough examination in the context of the Government's Comprehensive Spending Review.
Mr. Campbell-Savours:
To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what progress has been made in the development of a computerised animal identification system. [14]
Mr. Rooker:
Cattle born from 1 July 1996 are already registered on the Agriculture Departments' computer databases.
I am considering responses to proposals for a computerised database of cattle movements. I intend to take forward rapidly the creation of this database, so that it can be brought into effect in Great Britain well ahead of the Community's deadline.
Mr. Campbell-Savours:
To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what assessment he has made of the extent to which the current proposals for the identification of cattle meet European requirements for the lifting of the beef ban in the Florence agreement. [15]
Mr. Rooker:
The existing GB cattle passport system, implemented in July 1996, fulfils the Florence pre-condition for an affective animal identification movement recording system with official registration. A cattle database already existed in Northern Ireland.
Mr. Campbell-Savours:
To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what assessment he has made of the adequacy of the food safety regulations; and to what extent they are currently being applied. [42]
As Chief Executive of the Meat Hygiene Service (MHS) your Parliamentary Question to the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food concerning the number of veterinarians dismissed for failure to ensure compliance with health inspection regulations over the last 36 months has been passed to me for reply.(13)
The Meat Hygiene Service (MHS) was established as an Executive Agency of the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (MAFF) on 1 April 1995. It took over from some 300 local authorities responsibility for enforcing meat hygiene, inspection and animal welfare at slaughter legislation in licensed fresh meat premises in England, Scotland and Wales. The MHS has no information about veterinarians dismissed prior to this date.
The MHS directly employs 45 Official Veterinary Surgeons. In addition, the Agency makes use of 131 full time equivalent contract OVS. These OVSs work together with Meat Hygiene Inspectors as meat hygiene and inspection teams in abattoirs. MHS staff take appropriate action to ensure plant operators comply with the relevant hygiene, inspection and animal welfare legislation. The MHS operates a clear hierarchy of enforcement starting with informal advice and guidance escalating, where problems persist or are severe, to the service of statutory notices, and ultimately progressing in severity to prosecution or action by the State Veterinary Service to revoke the premises licence where there has been a failure to respond to earlier requirements. No directly employed OVSs have been dismissed for failure to ensure compliance with this legislation. A number of contract OVSs have had their contracts terminated as their performance has not proved satisfactory.
The MHS has recently reinforced its instructions to its staff on ensuring compliance with hygiene legislation. All MHS staff have been reminded of the importance of ensuring full compliance with hygiene controls, and of those procedures which must be followed in relation to hygienic carcase dressing. In particular staff were reminded that meat showing evidence of contamination must not be health marked as fit for sale for human consumption. Where there is evidence that the health mark has been applied to a carcase showing signs of visible contamination, this will be regarded, prima facie, as a potential gross misconduct, and will be the subject of disciplinary investigation. Gross misconduct is a dismissable offence.
The MHS is also responsible for enforcing Specified Bovine Material (SBM) controls in licensed premises. These controls are central to the protection of public health from any risk of BSE. They require the removal from all cattle at slaughter of all those tissues that might, in theory, harbour BSE infectivity. MHS staff are also fully aware that they may face disciplinary action as a result of any failure to enforce these controls. One contract OVS has received a written caution.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |