IN June some 500 people were invited to Brussels to hear about the proposed new animal health law.
There has been extensive consultation and the law has been under development since 2004, with a strategy document published in 2007. The next stage is for the European Parliament to ratify the legislation and the detail is expected to be adopted in 2016. Veterinary surgeons are seen as major players in fulfilling the objectives.
So, what is it all about? The day before the conference I was invited to discuss some of the issues with the head of the animal health unit, Dr Alberto Laddomada. Google lists that he is a veterinary surgeon with a postgraduate interest in virology.
It is unlikely that he would wish to be called on to carry out a caesarean on a cow but if he was he may well question why the problem has arisen in the first place. The whole thrust that has arisen from nine years of work is that “prevention is better than cure” and this approach dictates all the changes to come.
Reducing cross-border risk
It is difficult to be sure of where direction from the Commission and the Parliament stops. In theory, each member state is responsible for disease control within its country’s borders but, as disease does not recognise borders, one country cannot put other member states at risk. In future, it is hoped that the risk of cross-border disease will be reduced.
In this context, the UK needs to be a good European and consider the whole of the EU. This involves not just the transfer of disease across borders but EU Ltd has a brand and a reputation to defend, so that a breakdown in the wholesomeness of the product can affect members whether a particular country has a problem or not.
There were a number of stands at the conference with interesting literature. The French Agricultural Research Centre for International Development (CIRAD) produced a handbook of over 100 pages on footand-mouth disease, which has been translated into English.
In an assessment of surveillance and risk the text reads, “An underestimation and misunderstanding of risks, and poorly applied surveillance measures are weaknesses that benefit the virus. The most striking example is the 2001 epizootic in Great Britain, which experts had considered to be a country facing a very low risk of footand-mouth disease due to the protection provided by being an island.
“However, an inadequate supervision of farms and the feeding of pigs with insufficiently heated swill imported from Asia opened the door to the virus. The result was the massive slaughter of animals and economic losses estimated at nearly 13 billion euros.”
Copies of this handbook are available and comments on the content are requested via http://savoirpartages.cirad.fr/.
A single law
Some 400 items of legislation are to be streamlined into a single law. The aim is that the rules will be simpler and clearer so that authorities can focus on the key priorities of preventing and eradicating disease with a clarification of responsibilities for farms, veterinary surgeons and others dealing with animals.
New technologies are to be encouraged, including the surveillance of pathogens, electronic identification and the registration of animals.
The early detection and control of animal diseases is to be improved, including emerging diseases linked to climate change, and there will be more flexibility to adjust rules to local circumstances.
It would appear that the term “local” is an important point for future action. There is no definition whether “local” is a farm, parish, county or country, as that will be up to the directors of a member state to decide. It is likely that local control will change with particular disease situations and level of understanding.
It is indicated that the categorisation and prioritisation of animal health measures will become increasingly relevant and important. Animal diseases are to be listed and categorised according to their level of risk by operating a systematic and scientific basis. The lower the risk, the fewer resources will be allocated for control and prevention.
“Compartmentalisation” is a term to pay attention to where a risk-based approach will indicate that some farms are considered safe even during disease outbreaks.
Big numbers
Available literature indicates that across the EU there are at least 2 billion birds (chickens, laying hens, turkeys, etc.), 334 million mammals (pigs, sheep, goats, cattle, fur animals, etc.) on 13.7 million animal holdings contributing a livestock farming output of €156 billion a year. There are 25 million food businesses operating along the agri-food chain.
As well as the four elements of the review package (animal health, plant health, plant reproductive material and official controls), a fifth proposal aims to establish a multi-annual programme for financing actions to ensure a high level of health for humans, animals and plants.
It is recognised that disease outbreaks can have significant impacts on food consumption and international trade in animals and animal products. Thus, animal disease directly impacts on EU competitiveness and job creation.
There were over 30 speakers at the conference with many comments on the scope and detail of the proposed laws.
Several speakers expressed concern over the introduction of fees. Mandatory fees are to be collected from all registered food and feed businesses but micro-businesses will be exempt. The definition and registration of a microbusiness may become important to farms and even large veterinary practices.
As all the costs are to be recovered by the EU, it was indicated that compliant operators should be rewarded when the final framework details are developed.
The director of veterinary and international affairs, Bernard Van Goetham, urged delegates to view the website of the RASFF, ec.europa/rasff (Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed).
Barbara Logar from the European Commission emphasised the improvements expected in the tools available to offer an effective response with emerging diseases and stated that the new law encompasses production, kept and wild animals and their products, both terrestrial and aquatic.
Etienne Bonbon, of the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE), pointed out that some aspects indicated by the new law were already a part of OIE standards that seek good governance throughout the food chain.
The requirements for veterinary education “to ensure the performance of veterinary services” is important, together with the need to protect disease-free countries from disease introduction.
Vaccine banks
Dr Karin Schwabenbauer, chief veterinary officer of Germany, welcomed the progress made but is anxious to see the “whole package”, including the proposed control regulations.
The deployment of vaccine banks was referred to as relevant to countering evolving disease threats and the role of the vet was emphasised in surveillance and forming part of consumer confidence in disease control.
Declan O’Brien, of the International Federation for Animal Health – Europe (IFAH), emphasised that the efficacy of treatment needs to be included in surveillance as some diseases are becoming more difficult to treat, with particular concern over antibiotics.
There were indications that farmers and direct stakeholders should be involved in the development of biosecurity proposals, with the real work to achieve better animal health to take place outside of the Parliament and Commission buildings.
Alberto Laddomada emphasised that implementation will be very, very important and that the role of the vet is clearer now than with earlier legislation. Positive partnerships are indicated where the private and the public sectors will work together.
In conclusion Paola Testori Coggi, director-general DG Health & Consumers, indicated that the European Parliament in its deliberations is expected to maintain the philosophy of the proposals: to stop food fraud and to improve disease preparedness and disease prevention.
When implemented, the capacity of the EU to reduce the economic impact of disease outbreaks will be improved.
- Further information is available via http://ec.europa/dgs/health_consumer and search for animal health law.
