Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Seanad Éireann díospóireacht -
Friday, 3 Jul 1998

Vol. 156 No. 10

Adjournment Matters. - EU Prohibition of Equine Medicines.

I am pleased to have the opportunity to put on record the concerns of the equine industry, both the thoroughbred and non-thoroughbred, regarding the proposed prohibition of equine medicines by the EU in January 2000 and also with regard to the number of widely used preparations that are, in theory at least, banned at present. The Minister of State has a personal knowledge of the equine industry.

There is great concern about proposals in this area emanating from recent directives. The problem seems to be because the EU classifies the horse as a food producing animal. It is not widely accepted in this country that it is such, but up to 50 per cent of horses, having been humanely slaughtered, are exported and reach the food chain on the Continent and elsewhere. It is not part of the culture of this or our neighbouring island to eat horsemeat. No distinction is made between recreational horses and those bred for food production by the EU as a large number of recreational horses enter the food chain at the end of their lives. EEC Council Regulation 2377/90 stipulates that maximum residue limits must be established for any substance intended for use in food producing animals prior to its use. The MRL for any substance must be established before it is used. This applies to medicines for us and to veterinary medicines and pharmaceuticals which enter the food chain. Hence the problem we now face.

For the establishment of these MRLs pharmaceutical companies must submit applications supported by specific data relating to the pharmacological and toxicological profile of the substance as well as the results of residue depletion studies in the species for which the substance is intended. Substances are classified in four different annexes. More than 300 pharmacological substances of which the Minister will be aware, some as simple as vitamins, honey and glycerol, are commonly used as feed additives in routine husbandry in Ireland.

Besides the establishment of MRLs, community legislation requires that no veterinary medicinal product may be placed on the market of a member state unless a marketing authorisation has been issued under Council Directive 81/851. The number of substances for which MRLs have been established for horses is very limited and the number of products which have been granted a marketing authorisation for use on horses is even more limited. The cost of producing such a data package is such that pharmaceutical companies do not consider it a fair return on their investment due to the market being too small. This is the major difficulty faced by the horse industry. This also has the effect of the companies being unwilling to develop new products for the use in minor species such as the horse.

Some life threatening conditions in horses, such as shock and colic, can hardly be treated as the most essential products to treat such conditions — analgesics, gaseous anaesthetics, intravenous fluids, cardiac antidotes and medicines affecting the gastrointestinal tract — are not always available because they cannot be used legally if the letter of the law is adhered to. This situation is growing worse daily as the products with only temporary licences disappear as a result of MRL regulation.

In the United States where 100,000 horses are slaughtered exclusively for export to the EU, the Food and Drug Administration randomly takes spot samples from horses at slaughterhouses to monitor residues. When residues are present above permitted levels the owner of the animal is held responsible except when the veterinarian fails to provide information about the waiting period to be observed. The situation in Canada and South America is comparable to the US.

To simply exclude recreational horses from the food chain is not a solution since there are no reliable or enforceable safeguards to ensure protection of public health. If consumer protection is the objective two procedures must be put in place — first, residue testing of horsemeat in the slaughterhouses, and, second, a reliable foolproof identification and traceability scheme. This would mean microchip identification and the use of a medication passport which would be presented at the slaughterhouse.

If this problem is not effectively addressed by the EU legislators it will result in our horse population not receiving the therapy to which it is entitled and we will compromise our horse welfare with legislation which is not applicable to 73 per cent of horsemeat sourced outside the EU. This is an important point for those who eat horsemeat. The hardship we are causing the horse industry in the EU is being created without regard to where most of the meat is sourced. There is no logic to the manner in which the EU handles the system.

New therapies will not be developed in Europe for the treatment of equine diseases because the pharmaceutical companies do not want the associated expense and research. Long-term scientific research into horse welfare is in jeopardy because of current directives.

We will create a black market in which drugs will be sourced from outside the EU to treat the more valuable horses in the State or those owned by the wealthy. One of the great passions in urban and rural Ireland is the horse, not just for those who own horses but for the betting and racing industries and children who grow up with ponies and horses in the country. Horses are one of the great addictions of Irish people at all levels of society. We only have to look at the debate about horses around Dublin to know how sensitive we must be when handling these issues. We insist on strict welfare conditions for horses tethered at the side of the road, but we hamper those who insist on exemplary well being for their horses and we are pushing them into the black market.

It is incumbent upon us for the sake of our horses to take a proper look at the problem and agree a solution which will achieve two objectives — protect the consumer and offer our horses the best possible treatments. This can be achieved by testing for residues in slaughterhouses while implementing a foolproof identification scheme for all horses. There have been discussions about this matter in the Department during the past month. I was approached by the Irish Thoroughbred Breeders Association and I commend them for their interest and concern. I am also speaking as a member of the Equestrian Federation of Ireland, the umbrella body for the non-thorough-bred industry. There is major concern for a major industry which is a huge contributor to GNP and employment and gives wonderful pleasure throughout the State.

The meeting which took place in the Department was attended by some eminent veterinarians. I understand that a group has been set up to clearly identify where problems may arise. They will then report through the Irish Medicines Board to the European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicines, the central group in Europe based in the UK, which makes these decisions. The Minister should ensure there is broad representation on this group. It should not be unwieldy, but it must ensure that all equine interests in the State are represented and heard on this issue.

I hope the Minister will give this problem the urgent attention it requires. There are serious concerns about the protection of our horse population. It is inconceivable that large racing and breeding communities, the properly organised non-thoroughbred community — including showjumpers, eventers, dressage owners — and the huge range of people involved in horse production and breeding have no legal access to such commonly used drugs as phenylbutizone, antibiotics, analgesics, anaesthetics, intravenous fluids, vitamins and minerals, which will shortly be removed from the market when the temporary licences expire and driven underground.

I compliment the Irish Farmers Association horse committee which raised this topic at a meeting in Brussels last month. I compliment Peter Gibbons MRCVS from whom I have quoted liberally. He is a member of the ITBA veterinary committee. I also thank Des Leydon of the Irish Equine Centre who presented an excellent paper at the COPA meeting in Brussels.

We have excellent people in this country who are prepared to give their time to come to a resolution of the problem which would meet the needs of the industry and ensure that public health is protected. We need a balanced approach but we need to move urgently.

I thank the Senator for raising this matter and I am sympathetic to her comments. There are two elements of EU legislation which affect the availability of equine medicines. Council Regulation 2377/90 lays down the principle that medicines may not be administered to food producing animals unless a maximum residue limit — MRL — is fixed for the active substance. The deadline for setting such MRLs expires generally on 1 January 2000 while the deadline for four specific substances expired on 1 January 1998. The other element of EU legislation which is of relevance is Council Directive 64/432 under which the horse is defined as a food producing animal. It is almost sacrilege to consider such a thing in this country. While horsemeat is not consumed in Ireland, we slaughter horses for export for human food at the rate of around 50 per week. Based on the estimated horse population this would indicate that roughly 50 per cent of our horse population is disposed of in this manner.

The difficulties arising from lack of availability of suitable medicines across a range of animal species, including the horse sector, was the subject of discussions between the European Commission and member states earlier this year. At that meeting, Irish representatives outlined the difficulties arising in certain sectors, including the horse sector, and stressed the need to find a solution. The Commission acknowledged the difficulties in this area and has undertaken to examine a range of potential solutions in terms of legislative and supportive actions. My Department has been following up the matter with the Commission and I understand that the inter-service consultations involving the relevant Directorates General are ongoing.

In addition, a meeting was held recently involving my Department and representatives of the various bodies associated with the horse industry to examine further the potential options. At this meeting it was agreed that a group comprising representation from the industry, the veterinary bodies, the Irish Medicines Board and my Department would be established to develop viable solutions which would have a reasonable possibility of satisfying the Commission. This group will meet as soon as each has had the opportunity to consider the matter further. In the interim, my Department asked the industry to identify precisely the list of affected products for which no viable alternative exists. The situation is unsatisfactory and I have been concerned about it for some time. I accept that solutions need to be found and as I have already outlined, my Department in its discussions with the Commission has emphasised the urgency of finding solutions for horses.

This also applies to the artificial insemination scheme. Vets must now issue certificates which can cost £25 and vets will not always be as readily available as the AI man. This also puts extra costs on the suckler scheme which is a low profit scheme. This is ridiculous and we are doing our best to address it. If the ground changes people will have to use phenylbutizone to save horses. We are urgently looking for a solution. The Senator has the support of the Department on this matter.

Barr
Roinn