| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Lord Falconer of Thoroton: My Lords, I shall have to check, but I understand that the number of pilots from the old scheme now employed under the new scheme is in the region of 14. The document placed on the DTLR website yesterday, to which my noble friend Lord Berkeley referred, sets out the experience since the change in the scheme. That does not suggest at the moment that there has been a change in relation to safety levels. We have to look at the figures carefully.
Lord Swinfen: My Lords, is the Minister satisfied that the new pilots on the Humber—not the experienced ones—have sufficient experience in handling a large variety of different vessels under different weather and tidal conditions in confined waters?
Lord Falconer of Thoroton: My Lords, these are vital issues. Again, the detailed study of what has been going on suggests that standards are being maintained. It is important that standards are maintained. We do not have any evidence that they are not.
Lord Greenway: My Lords, does the Minister agree that, quite apart from the most important safety aspect, the confidence of master mariners using the
Humber for trading purposes is at stake? Can the Government use their influence to bring both parties to accept independent arbitrators to sort out the distressing dispute?
Lord Falconer of Thoroton: My Lords, confidence is very important, as the noble Lord says. It is therefore very important to consider the system based on the facts set out in the document to which I referred. Obviously, it would be best if any dispute were resolved, but that is a matter between the port authority and the pilots.
Illegal Meat Imports
2.49 p.m.
Lord Rotherwick asked Her Majesty's Government:
- Whether they are content with the detection rate of illegal meat imports.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Lord Whitty): My Lords, the term "detection rate" in this context is not appropriate or, indeed, calculable. If the noble Lord wants to know whether I am satisfied that we have yet done all that is needed to minimise the risk of illegal meat imports, the answer is no. That is why the Government published an action plan on 28th March, the aim of which is to reduce the risk of exotic animal disease and plant disease entering the country and threatening our public health and our livestock, agriculture and horticulture sectors.
Lord Rotherwick: My Lords, I thank the noble Lord for that Answer. Will he confirm that, in 2000, the passenger luggage searched on 14 aircraft arriving from West Africa revealed more than five tonnes of illegal meat such as bushmeat and endangered species? Can he say how many people have been fined, and how many deported, for importing illegal meat in the past three years?
Lord Whitty: My Lords, the figures which the noble Lord gives for 2000 are broadly correct. As he will realise, however, the detection rate includes the detection of fish and other species that are unlikely to have conveyed animal disease to susceptible animals in this country. In that period there were no prosecutions in relation to public hygiene matters, but two successful prosecutions occurred in relation to endangered species.
Lord Geraint: My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that we imported foot and mouth disease into this country last year? This year, we are importing illegal meat from foreign countries. We are also putting more restrictions and regulation on farmers than ever before. Can the Minister tell us what is wrong within his department?
Lord Whitty: My Lords, the tone of the question suggests that the disease spread due to lax import
controls, and that the most probable origin of the disease was illegally imported meat. However, the disaster of the disease was due to the rapid spread and mingling of animals before the disease was detected within this country. The two are therefore not related. However, the Government have taken steps not only to achieve better bio-security and controls on movement within the country, but also to give greater powers and priority to the detection of meat entering this country by means of both passenger and commercial traffic.
Lord Campbell of Alloway: My Lords, does the noble Lord understand that there will always be a problem about a detection rate as one cannot know what has not been detected? What is the size of the problem? Can he assist the House with the Government's estimate of the broad scope of illegal imports?
Lord Whitty: My Lords, the two parts of the noble Lord's question seem slightly to cut across each other. I agree with him on the first part; indeed, I made that point in my initial reply to the noble Lord, Lord Rotherwick. The same applies to the second part. I cannot give an overall assessment of what is not detected. I can, however, say that there is a serious level of illegal importation. The Government are directing their action plan to ensure that resources are properly prioritised to try to deal with it.
Baroness Masham of Ilton: My Lords, is the Minister aware that, with the haunches of gorillas and monkeys coming in, human diseases—frightening diseases such as ebola—also can come in? Is it not time to introduce more sniffer dogs, which are more clever than humans in detecting these problems?
Lord Whitty: My Lords, we are certainly examining its feasibility. Detection of all sorts—by machinery, by people, and potentially by dogs—is one way of tightening up on the controls. The noble Baroness is absolutely correct that the potential for passing human disease is one aspect we have to watch for.
Baroness Sharples: My Lords, what is the maximum fine that can be imposed on those who import illegal meat?
Lord Whitty: My Lords, the maximum fine for the import of illegal meat generally is £5,000, or two years' imprisonment, but higher if it involves endangered species.
Lord Monro of Langholm: My Lords, the Minister will be aware that we have been complaining for 12 months about imports of meat to this country both by ship and by air. There has been singularly little result. Last month he mentioned an action plan. Can he say now how many more inspectors we shall have at airports and how many more for shipping? When will the pressure brought by those of us on this side bring some results? It is quite unfair that he has refused to
hold a public inquiry which might produce some results. Moreover, farmers are thoroughly fed up with the Government's dilatory approach to imports.
Lord Whitty: My Lords, I do not think that that is either accurate or fair. The Government have recognised that there is a problem of imports and achieving better checks. However, we have always made the parallel point—which not all of our critics have—that internal controls are just as important as import checks. As I have often said to the House, the issue is not so much numbers—there are multiple purposes for the inspections and checks made by all the agencies including Customs, the port authorities and others—but prioritisation and co-ordination between the various agencies. The action plan is directed to precisely that.
Baroness Gibson of Market Rasen: My Lords, we have discussed the issue of illegal meat being imported to this country. However, is my noble friend satisfied with our safeguards for the legal importation of meat?
Lord Whitty: My Lords, I am satisfied that the level of inspection in the commercial trade of legal meat is very robust. There is 100 per cent documentation check on all containers, and the level of physical spot checks on containers varies from one in five to one in two depending on the content. I am therefore satisfied on the commercial side. On the passenger side, there is the issue of passengers being allowed up to one kilogram, under European legislation, of meat from third countries. We have raised the issue of whether that is appropriate with Commissioner Byrne and look to pursue it at the European level.
Baroness Byford: My Lords, I wish to press the Minister further. First, he has told the House that, in fighting the disease, internal movements are as important as preventing its importation. I question that. If the disease were not in this country, we would not have the problem. Secondly, he has acknowledged that it probably arose from imported food. If so, why cannot the European countries, particularly the United Kingdom, take note of what happens in foreign countries where the import of such meat in personal possessions is not allowed? Finally, will he please call for a public inquiry so that we can sort out the matter?
Lord Whitty: My Lords, I have every confidence that the inquiries which the Government have initiated will concentrate on, among other things, the issue of import controls, and that they will do so rather more effectively than lengthy legalistic public inquiries for which certain Members of the House continue to hanker. Those inquiries will report by this summer. A public inquiry would take several months, and possibly years, longer. I therefore do not think that truth or effective action would result from that.
I have now completely forgotten the first part of the noble Baroness's question.
Next Section
Back to Table of Contents
Lords Hansard Home Page