140 likes | 259 Views
Information Paper. Review of EU Animal By-Products Regulation 1774/2002/EC (ABPR) Presentation by Neil Leach (Defra). ACAF/09/16. ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON ANIMAL FEEDINGSTUFFS 48th Meeting of ACAF on 3 December 2009. November 2009. Review of EU Animal By-Products Regulation 1774/2002/EC (ABPR).
E N D
Information Paper Review of EU Animal By-Products Regulation 1774/2002/EC (ABPR)Presentation by Neil Leach (Defra) ACAF/09/16 ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON ANIMAL FEEDINGSTUFFS 48th Meeting of ACAF on 3 December 2009 November 2009
Review of EU Animal By-Products Regulation 1774/2002/EC (ABPR)
Background • Recognise ABPR has the reputation for being over burdensome and imposing unnecessary controls. • Negotiated in 2001-2 against background of rising BSE incidence in continental Europe and UK Foot and Mouth Disease outbreak where breakdown in ABP controls implicated • Focus therefore on putting in place tight controls ensuring risk of future disease problems minimized.
Background • However, recognising this the European Commission inserted a clause in the ABPR (Article 35) to provide for a review of its operation in the light of experience • Review began in 2005 .
Commission’s objectives for amending ABPR • The Commission’s report on its review carried out at end of 2005 identified three areas for change and which UK supported: • the scope of the Regulation (i.e. the point at which the controls should cease to apply); • how to deal with very low risk products which are used for low risk purposes; and • the relationship with other legislation (e.g. TSE, food hygiene and waste legislation).
Progress with proposal and next steps • Since 2006 there has been extensive consultation at UK and EU level on Commission proposal to amend the Regulation in line with stated objectives. • Separated into a Council and Parliament regulation and a Commission regulation (equivalent to the articles and annexes of Regulation (EC) 1774/2002 respectively).
Progress with proposal and next steps • Proved to be a fair degree of consensus and constructive discussion which has resulted in agreement on the Council and Parliament regulation Due to be published in OJ on 14 November. • This new regulation will come into effect in early 2011 giving time to agree the Commission regulation (the detailed implementing rules) and redraft our domestic enforcing legislation.
New Commission Regulation • Still under negotiation. 15 months provided to put in place • Layout and order follow the Council and Parliament Regulation • Defra informal consultation on Commission Regulation completed
Domestic Enforcing Legislation • Have same 15 month period to put in place domestic legislation • Still at early stages of development • Formal consultation to follow
Revised regulation and feed controls No change to basic ABP feed restrictions i.e.: • Processed animal protein must not be fed to animals of same species • No feeding of catering waste to farmed animals
Revised regulation and feed controls • TSE controls remain in place in TSE regulation and run alongside ABP controls e.g.: • Fishmeal cannot be fed to ruminants(with limited exceptions) • PAP from poultry cannot be fed to pigs and vice versa
Revised regulation and feed controls • Driver for future changes to feed controls remains TSE legislation not ABP legislation – set out in TSE roadmap. • However some limited room for manoeuvre………..
Scope for changes to feed controls in revised ABP implementing rules Feeding of aquatic and terrestrial invertebrates • Now category 3 and should be available for feeding. • However, need to change definition of fishmeal and /or PAP in implementing rules to allow suitably treated material to be available for feeding. UK pressing for this. Feeding to zoo animals • Already provisions for feeding fallen stock. Now provision of feeding fallen zoo animals to other zoo animals . Concerns remain on feeding SRM in view of previous cases of TSEs in zoo cats
End point of ABP controls: compound feed containing PAPs • Has been interest in new concept of “end point” for ABP controls i.e. where products treated to a point so that no risk remains and fall outside scope of the regulation • Aware there is interest in seeking exemption of compound feed containing PAPs from certain traceability and labelling requirements of the regulation • This may be difficult to justify where risk of diversion remains of feeding to non- eligible livestock