Vaccines
12. Ultimately, the most sustainable strategy for
controlling bovine TB is likely to be a cattle vaccine. MAFF has
recently published a report on progress made in the TB vaccine
research programme in the period July 1999 to June 2000. This
included the particularly interesting information that a vaccine
which did not interfere with the tuberculin test (one of the main
criteria to be met by a successful candidate) was being tested
in a large cattle vaccination experiment in New Zealand. Dr Reynolds,
Veterinary Head of the Endemic Animal Diseases & Zoonoses
Team at MAFF, played down the significance of this.[32]
However, we are hopeful that progress is being made and that MAFF's
collaborative links will put the UK in a position to benefit from
this work. As ever, the development of a cattle vaccine is ten
to fifteen years away.[33]
We recognise that there can be no short cuts and that the absence
of a vaccine makes
it all the more important that the current programme
delivers in terms of a strategy to control bovine TB.
Future policy
13. It is now two years since the start of the trial,
with a projected end-date of 2004 or possibly 2002.[34]
We believe that it is time that MAFF turned its attention to possible
policy options once the results of the trial are known. After
the long-drawn out implementation of the Krebs programme, a further
prolonged period of contemplation following the completion of
the trial would be wholly unacceptable. MAFF continues to state
merely that "policies will be judged according to the impact
on public health, on animal health and welfare, on the environment
and on the economy, in particular the farming industry and public
expenditure".[35]
However, it appears that no forward planning has been put into
what the policy options might be, especially if, as seems likely,
the advice put forward by the ISG is disputable and disputed.
The Minister told us that she "quite envisage[s] circumstances
in which policy options will be before Ministers, without the
clarity and certainty of data and information that everyone agrees
on, and everyone agrees on the way forward," and that she
would be looking to the ISG to interpret data where the results
from the different culling strategies were contradictory.[36]
We believe that Ministers have to recognise that this might
mean deciding to extend the trial beyond the end-date or beyond
its current scope or it might mean finding some Plan B, which
does not seem to be in development at the moment. It is the responsibility
of Ministers, not of the ISG, to make the ultimate decisions and
we believe that this process must be put in train now and not
delayed until the crisis of no clear results from such an expensive
and controversial programme is upon us. We will continue to
take an active interest in this inquiry and look forward to receiving
the third Bourne Report early next year and further annual progress
reports from MAFF thereafter.
2 Fifth Report from the Agriculture Committee, Session
1998-99, Badgers and Bovine Tuberculosis, HC 233. Back
3 The
field trial involves comparing three different badger control
strategies (proactive culling, reactive culling
following the discovery of bovine TB in cattle, and survey only)
in ten triplets located in TB hot-spots. Details of
the programme are set out and discussed at length in our Fifth
Report of Session 1998-99. Back
4 Power
calculations are used to establish the probability of detecting
an effect of a given size with a stated level of significance. Back
5 Ev.
pp. 4-7, Annex A. Back
6 Q
31. Back
7 A
herd breakdown is said to have occurred when a cow has reacted
positively to the TB test. It is the standard way
of measuring the incidence of bovine TB. Back
8 First
report of the Statistical Auditor, www.maff.gov.uk/animalh/tb. Back
9 Ev.
p. 2, para 7. Back
10 Ev.
p. 2, para 7. Back
11 Humaneness
of MAFF's Badger Despatch Procedures,
p. 16. Back
12 Q
1. Back
13 Ibid, Back
14 Ev.
p. 23, para 29. Back
15 Ev.
p. 4, para 24. Back
16 Ev.
p. 21, para 22. Back
17 Q
2. Back
18 MAFF
News Release 387/00. Back
19 Q
3. Back
20 Q
2. Back
21 Q
96. Back
22 Q
52. Back
23 Qq
53-4. Back
24 Q
54. Back
25 Ev.
p. 3, para 21 Back
26 Q
88. Back
27 Q
89. Back
28 Ev.
p. 4, para 28. Back
29 Ev.
p. 26, para 50. Back
30 Ev.
p. 46. Back
31 Q
136. Back
32 Q
134. Back
33 Qq
128-129. Back
34 Ev.
p. 17; Q 1. Back
35 Ev.
p. 28, para 57. Back
36 Q
153. Back