§ Dr. LadymanTo ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what estimates his Department has made of the increased cost to the consumer if antibiotic growth promoters were banned in the production of poultry, pigs and beef. [43793]
§ Mr. RookerNo such estimates have been made. However, figures produced by the European Federation of Feed Additive Manufacturers indicate that withdrawal of antibiotic growth promoters could result in increased production costs of up to 10 per cent., with a cost to EU farmers and consumers of almost ecu 2,500 million per year.
§ Dr. LadymanTo ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what studies his Department has made of the experience of countries which have banned the use of antibiotic growth promoters in animal husbandry. [43792]
§ Mr. RookerThe use of antibiotic growth promoters is controlled under EC Directive 70/524/EEC. Information in support of bans in certain Member states has been submitted to the European Commission's Scientific Committee on Animal Nutrition (SCAN). This information has either already been considered by the UK's independent scientific Veterinary Products Committee, which advises Agriculture and Health Ministers, or is to be reviewed by the Committee shortly.
§ Dr. LadymanTo ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what estimates he has made of the increased levels of(a) nitrates and (b) phosphates which will be excreted if antibiotic growth promoters are banned in the production of pigs, poultry and cattle. [43791]
§ Mr. RookerFigures from the European Federation of Animal Feed Additive Manufacturers and the National Office of Animal Health indicate that withdrawal of antibiotic growth promoters in France, Germany and the UK would result in the excretion of an additional 78,000 tonnes of nitrogen and 15,000 tones of phosphorus each year.