§ Mr. HeppellTo ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1) what proportion of calves that are exported from the United Kingdom are checked by MAFF at the time that an export certificate is signed to see if they are from herds with histories of either bovine spongiform encephalopathy or enzootic bovine leukosis; [38707]
(2) how many calves from herds known to have had BSE have been exported in each of the last five years; and to which countries they have been sent; [38709]
(3) how many calves from herds known to have had EBL have been exported in each of the last five years; and if he will indicate to which countries they have been Sent. [38708]
§ Mrs. BrowningI refer the hon. Member to the answers that I gave to the hon. Member for Newham, North-West (Mr. Banks) on 16 October 1995,Official Report, column 125–26.
§ Mr. HeppellTo ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1) how many imperfect animal health certificates, including their schedules, were recorded by his staff monitoring livestock exports at Brightlingsea during September; [38695]
(2) what action was taken in respect of imperfect animal health certificates recorded by his staff at Brightlingsea during September. [38697]
§ Mrs. BrowningNo consignments of live animals exported out of Brightlingsea during September were accompanied by imperfect animal health certification.
§ Mr. HeppellTo ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1) how many imperfect animal health certificates, including their schedules, were recorded by his staff monitoring livestock exports at Dover during September; [38696]
(2) what action was taken in respect of imperfect animal health certificates recorded by his staff at Dover during September. [38698]
§ Mrs. BrowningIn September, the documentation accompanying two consignments of live animals which underwent official checks before their export from Dover was found to be incorrect. In the first instance, the export health certificate indicated that there were 260 animals in762W the consignment although there were in fact only 160. The certifying veterinary inspector confirmed that the certificate should have referred to 160 animals and amended the certificate appropriately, in accordance with official procedures for making such amendments. In the second instance, the export health certificate number was misread by the certifying veterinary inspector and misquoted on the accompanying schedule listing the animals in the consignment. As soon as the certifying inspector confirmed the error, the schedule was amended by MAFF personnel and the export allowed to proceed.