Monthly Archives: September 2015

How the control stage is been performed in conveyancing ?

Many respondents to the Adelaide conveyancing consultation has been concerned that a literal implementation of the requirements of the 1991. Directive would lead to supervision and inspection requirements which were so costly that many abattoirs would not be able to operate under them. The draft submission also said that the then Parliamentary Secretary has agreed to take account of the views of local authorities on the guidelines for supervision arrangements notwithstanding the fact that even as drafted they did not fully reflect the 1991 Directive.

In the light of the comments received from respondents to the consultation and in view of the difficulties faced by local authorities in resourcing the supervision. requirements as then currently provided for in the guidance, it was proposed to revise that guidance to make it clear what supervision arrangements would involve. It was also noted that that flexibility existed in the regulations then currently pertaining to exports to other Member States and had not been mentioned by European Commission inspectors in the course of their visits.

On 10 July MAFF officials put the final version of the submission to the then Parliamentary Secretary. Where a local authority had genuine difficulty in providing the full level of supervision required by the Directive they should ensure that the official. Following discussion, on 17 July the then Parliamentary Secretary was said to be broadly content with the proposals. The letter said that while MAFF acknowledged that some local authorities would prefer a definitive statement about veterinary attendance it would not be sensible or appropriate for MAFF to provide such a statement. within the parameters of the Directive, to manage the transition to the new arrangements sensibly and cost effectively.

Addressing concerns which had been raised in previous correspondence, MUFF said that if European Commission inspectors criticised local authorities who took advantage of the flexibility offered by the guidelines. MAFF would stand by the guidance and support any local authority who had used their best endeavours to provide an inspection service which complied with the Circular. MAFF would do what they could to assist local authorities who were having difficulties in providing veterinary cover. The final version of Circular FSH 1/92 said that from 1 January 1993 all premises covered by the regulations were subject to supervision by an official veterinary surgeon appointed by the local authority.