Memorandum by the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries
BRUCELLOSIS ORDER 1997 (S.I. 1997/758)
1. The Committee asked:
Article 1(2) defines "approved laboratory" as one
approved by the Minister and listed in Schedule 1. If
the Minister withdraws his approval for a laboratory, explain
how those who use it under regulation 7 for testing their milk
will be made aware, before Schedule 1 is amended, that the laboratory
has ceased to be approved.
2. Article 7(1)(a) requires specified persons to select an
approved laboratory. Article 7(1)(b) requires that person to
notify the Minister of the laboratory selected. Accordingly the
Ministry will have a record of the users of each laboratory.
In the event of an approval being removed the Ministry will notify
users of the fact.
3. The Committee asked:
Article 1(2) defines "full-term calving" as meaning
calving which takes place "271 days or more after
service or insemination, or 265 days after implantation or transfer
of an embryo". Ought not the words "or more" to
follow "265 days" also?
4. The Ministry accepts that the words should have been added
and will amend the Order when the opportunity arises.
5. The Committee asked:
Indicate where the noun "reactor" defined as respects
bovine animals in article 1(2) (as distinct from the verb "react")
is used in the provisions of this Order.
6. The term is used as a noun in article 6.
7. The Committee:
Indicate the purpose which justifies the serving under article
4 of a restriction of movement order. (Article 5 expresses the
purpose justifying a movement order under that article as "eradicating
8. A notice would be served under article 5 if an animal
on the premises is under investigation for brucellosis. This
could be, for example, because of spontaneous abortion, and, depending
on the circumstances brucellosis could be one possible cause.
Hence, although there is not yet enough information to diagnose
brucellosis, it would be desirable to isolate the animal as a
precautionary measure to prevent spread of the disease to other
animals; hence the use of the phrase "where he considers
it necessary for the purpose of eradicating brucellosis".
Article 4 is concerned with a different situation. It is a further
step down in the diagnostic process, and a notice would be served
where the animal under investigation has shown definite indications
of brucellosis, as opposed to showing symptoms where brucellosis
is one possible cause. As this would be a matter of clinical
judgment for the veterinary surgeon concerned, it was thought
better not to spell out in the legislation when such a notice
should be served. The Ministry accepts, however, that it would
have been better to indicate in some general way when such a
notice would be served, and regrets that this was not done. The
text will be amended when an opportunity arises.
16th June 1997