The Food Standards Agency (FSA) has advised the government not to lift a ban on the use of processed animal protein (PAP) in animal feed. The FSA board's advice comes after the European Commission's investigation into the reintroduction of such material in feed for non-ruminants; controversy has flared up across Europe in response to the plans.

Earlier in the month the FSA conducted a series of research studies in which it found that, having discussed the issue and been allowed to weigh up the potential risks and benefits of reintroducing PAP, the vast majority of consumers in the UK remained opposed to such a reintroduction. Popular sentiment across Europe appears to be the same as in the UK. image expired

PAP was banned in the EU at the height of the BSE crisis, when a link between the two was established. Proponents of PAP claim that it represents a 'greener' option, which will reduce the amount of increasingly expensive grains imported into the EU to sustain the bloc's livestock, and promise that more stringent rules on PAP will avoid a repeat of the BSE crisis.

Nevertheless, critics and the general public remain sceptical. Opponents maintain that not enough is currently known about how diseases like BSE are spread to risk deregulating PAP. The FSA board said, while "there is no evidence that the proposed changes could give rise to a new risk from a pig or poultry transmissible spongiform encephalopathy [TSEs], some uncertainty on the susceptibility of non-ruminants to TSEs exists."

Furthermore, the agency stated that, it was concerned the reintroduction proposals relied too heavily on effective enforcement of controls. An agency spokesperson said, "Having carefully considered the responses to the stakeholder engagement process, [the board] could identify no real benefit from the change that would justify putting consumers at any additional risk, however tiny."

Kendall on warpath over PAPs

However, some in the farming industry, who stand to gain from a reintroduction of PAP have reacted strongly to this consensus. Upon hearing of the FSA's recommendation, NFU President Peter Kendall wrote to Agriculture Minister Jim Paice to complain about the decision and attempt to challenge the FSA's findings. Kendall, who said the FSA's reponse could have a detrimental effect on the poultry industry in particular, also requested an urgent meeting with the board.

Kendall maintains PAP is "a sustainable source of high quality protein for animal feed which could be used to address the EU protein deficit and to reduce reliance on imported soya." He questioned the objectivity of the proceedings and even accused the FSA of ignoring evidence supplied by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA). He surmised, "A general mistrust of science or distaste about animal protein feed by board members or consumers must not over-ride the science and risk-based approach the agency claims to take in all matters." image expired

The FSA responded to Kendall's claims by restating that, while it agreed that the risk posed by PAP as laid out in the EFSA assessment was small, it relied too heavily on effective controls and enforcement, which "could not be guaranteed." An FSA spokesperson told Farming Online that the agency had outlined this stance in its response to Jim Paice when the board reached its decision at a meeting in Cardiff on 7th September.

In its response to the Defra minister, the FSA stated, "The uncertainty, referred to by EFSA, about whether pigs and poultry might be susceptible to a transmissible spongiform encephalopathy (TSE) and the risk that, if intra-species recycling could not be prevented, a TSE might spread undetected in these species, also raised concerns for the Board."

The Government will now consider the evidence and announce an official UK position on the PAP proposal. The commission will vote on the reintroduction of PAP later in the year.