ANIMAL FEEDING STUFFS (Hansard, 25 June 1973)

§ The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Mrs. Peggy Fenner)
I beg to move, That the Medicines (Feeding Stuffs Additives) Order 1973, a draft of which was laid before this House on 9th May, be approved. The order is intended to correct an anomaly in the Medicines Act 1968 to enable us to make comprehensive regulations relating to the labelling of medicated animal feeding stuffs. This is a complicated and technical matter which I shall do my best to make clear to the House. The Act contains provisions relating to the general control of medicated animal feeding stuffs. Medicated animal feeding stuffs are those in which a medicinal additive has been incorporated.
The additive may be a medicinal product as defined in Section 130 of the Act, or it may be a substance which, although not a medicinal product as defined, nevertheless has been incorporated in a feeding stuff for a medicinal purpose. This latter expression is also defined in Section 130 but the provisions for general control are in Sections 40–42 of the Act and are outside the scope of the order. In addition to the general provisions, Ministers have power under the Act to introduce further controls over medicated animal feeding stuffs, and the order deals with the proper application of these additional controls.
Naturally, it is desirable that they should apply to medicated animal feeding stuffs irrespective of whether the medicinal additive is a medicinal product or a substance added for medicinal purposes. It might help to make this difference clear if I take copper and its derivative, copper salt, as an example. Copper is not a medicinal product but as a copper salt it is frequently added to pig feed as a growth promoter. Under the Act such an additive is for a medicinal purpose.
The agriculture Ministers propose shortly to make regulations pertaining to the labelling of medicated feeding stuffs and leaflets supplied with such products. 1278 These regulations will be made under the provisions of Sections 85 and 86 as applied by Section 90. This latter section provides that Sections 85 and 86 shall have effect in relation to feeding stuffs in which medicinal products have been incorporated. But it makes no provision for their effect in relation to feeding stuffs in which substances that are not medicinal products—and I gave copper salt as a growth promoter as an example—have been incorporated for a medicinal purpose.
Because of this deficiency in Section 90 any regulations under Sections 85 and 86 relating to the labelling and so on of feeding stuffs will apply only to feeding stuffs containing medicinal products and copper salt incorporated for a medicinal purpose. The same would be true of Section 87, the use of which is not in immediate prospect. I believe that section deals with containers. The order will remedy this deficiency and it is being brought about in this way.
Section 104 empowers Ministers, in this instance the agriculture Ministers, to apply specific provisions of the Act to articles and substances which, although not medicinal products, are manufactured, sold, supplied, imported or exported for use wholly or partly for a medicinal purpose.
The provisions being applied by the order are those of Sections 90 and 91. I have not referred to Section 91 before. It deals with offences under Part V of the Act, which includes the other sections we are discussing. Clearly, therefore, we need Section 91 as well as Section 90. The substances and articles to which these provisions are to be applied by the order are those other than medicinal products which are intended to be incorporated in animal feeding stuffs for a medicinal purpose.
As the Act requires, a number of organisations representing interests likely to be substantially affected have been fully consulted, not only on this order but on the proposed labelling regulations, and have raised no objections. The Veterinary Products Committee, estab. lished under Section 4 of the Act to advise Ministers on veterinary medicines, recommends that the order be made.

§ Mr. Mark Hughes (Durham)
Are radioactive isotopes included within the scope of the definition the hon. Lady has given? I know that the use of radioactive isotopes as an additive in feeds is very rare, but it is conceivable that they could be used for veterinary purposes, and I should be interested to know whether they would count as being for medicinal purposes within the meaning of the order. I do not ask for an answer tonight.

§ Mrs. Fenner
I am obliged to the hon. Gentleman. I will see that he gets the answer in written form.

§ Mr. Norman Buchan (Renfrew, West)
Originally I had not intended to say anything, but I was willing to speak for a few moments while the hon. Lady and her officials began to look up the answer to the question asked by my hon. Friend the Member for Durham (Mr. Mark Hughes). However, she does not have to look it up now.
I thank the hon. Lady for her explanation of the order. We do not object to the order, which arises from a Labour Government Act. It will be useful and helpful, and she explained it very well. However, there are certain unforeseen things in the future, not least some of the new Common Market regulations, to which we may pay rather more attention.
On an unusually happy note for the pair of us, I thank the hon. Lady and her staff.