92001E1898

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1898/01

by Caroline Jackson (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(28 June 2001)

Subject: Fish meal and fish oil

Given the assurances in the White Paper that European consumers will be provided with essential and accurate information, as well as the need stressed by Commissioner Byrne for the European Union to re-establish public confidence in its food supply, science, law and controls,

1. Can the Commission state whether the temporary prohibition on the use of fish meal in ruminant diets has any basis in evidence that fish meal may contain the prion responsible for TSEs, and that it is thus capable of causing BSE in ruminants?

2. If not, what is the basis for the temporary prohibition?

3. Does the Food and Veterinary Office or EU vet services have proof that fish meal is more contaminated with MMBM than other feed ingredients?

4. Have the Food and Veterinary Office in Dublin and/or the EU Member States' veterinary services determined that there is any proven reason indicating that fish meal is more cross-contaminated with mammalian meat and bone meal (MMBM) than other feed ingredients?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(18 September 2001)

1. Council Decision 200/766/EC of 4 December 2000 concerning certain protection measures with regard to transmissible spongiform encephalopathies and the feeding of animal protein(1) suspends the use of fishmeal as an ingredient in feed destined for ruminants. This suspension

of fishmeal was taken as a precautionary management measure, pending re-evaluation of the implementation of Community rules in Member States. So far no scientific evidence links bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) to fishmeal.

2. The suspension, strongly supported by the Member States, was partly based on Food and Veterinary Office (FVO) inspections that identified systematic failures in the implementation of rules on animal feed in several Member States. It also follows the advice of the Scientific Steering Committee recommending that where cross-contamination between mammalian meat and bone meal (MMBM) and other feed materials could not be avoided, measures should be taken to protect public and animal health In this respect it should be recalled that at the time of the decision there was an insistance that the most stringent measures should be taken to avoid cross-contamination. The Commission has, however, undertaken to review the decision in the light of progress in strenghtening controls and especially of the development of more reliable tests for the presence of MMBM in fishmeal. The current measure is not a total prohibition, as a derogation exists, allowing the use of fishmeal in animal feed for species other than ruminants, provided that certain control measures are in place.

3. The FVO does not have any specific information on whether fishmeal is or not more contaminated with MMBM than other feed ingredients. This has not been the subject of any of the FVO missions in this area, these focusing on assessing the implementation by the competent authorities of the requirements and conditions established in Commission Decision 2001/9/EC of 29 December 2000 concerning control measures required for the implementation of Council Decision 2000/766/EC(2).

4. The FVO has no specific information on this matter.

5. Insofar as consumer information and confidence is concerned, there has been no adverse reaction to the decision from consumers or their representative groups. On the contrary consumers are increasingly favorable towards the non-use of any animal or fish derived protein in feedingsstuffs for ruminants as such protein does not form part of their natural diet.

(1) OJ L 306, 7.12.2000.

(2) OJ L 2, 5.1.2001.