House of Lords
Wednesday, 12th June 2002.
The House met at half-past two of the clock: The LORD CHANCELLOR on the Woolsack.
Prayers—Read by the Lord Bishop of Bristol.
Illegal Meal Imports
Lord Rotherwick asked Her Majesty's Government:
- Whether they intend to prosecute passengers for importing illegal meat.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Lord Whitty): My Lords, prosecutions are a matter for the enforcement authorities. The Government are committed to ensuring that there are effective deterrents in place. We are addressing the issues with all the agencies involved and working with them to improve intelligence sharing and to focus deterrence action for maximum impact.
Lord Rotherwick: My Lords, I thank the Minister for his Answer. However, is he aware that, given the Government's present record of stopping illegal meat imports, most people would believe that this Government had little interest in halting this grisly trade? Indeed, in the past couple of years there have been only three prosecutions and those were brought under the CITES convention. Only a few aircraft have been stopped coming into Heathrow from West Africa. The passengers, when searched, were found to be carrying literally tonnes of illegal meat. When do the Government intend to get tough and prosecute these gangs and individuals who at the moment flout our laws and bring in illegal meat such as bushmeat which could cause serious animal and human diseases?
Lord Whitty: My Lords, I repeat that the Government are not the prosecuting authority; prosecutions are a matter for the enforcement agencies. The noble Lord is, of course, right to the extent that there has been detection of illegal meat. By and large that meat was not of itself likely to cause animal disease but did present a public hygiene problem and possibly a problem as regards endangered species. Clearly, the Government's intention is to reduce the motivation for bringing in such meat, to increase the deterrents and to involve the airlines, the port authorities and the enforcement authorities in minimising that trade.
Earl Peel: My Lords, given the threat to which my noble friend referred and given the very real concern that exists within the farming community, bearing in mind that both foot and mouth and swine fever probably both came in on the back of illegally imported meat, do not the Government accept that, instead of having several agencies which are
responsible for this problem, the time is now right to have one sole agency that is properly funded with the correct level of personnel and the ability to buy all the necessary surveillance equipment in order to deal with this very real problem?
Lord Whitty: My Lords, the relative jurisdictions of the various agencies is one of the issues that the Government are addressing. To change the structure of jurisdiction would require legislation and is therefore a medium-term prospect. In the meantime we are looking at co-operation and better co-ordination and the prioritisation of those authorities which exist which, of course, have wider responsibilities than stopping illegal meat imports.
Baroness Masham of Ilton: My Lords, why do we not take this matter as seriously as do Australia and New Zealand? Is the Minister aware that dogs can be trained to search out human bodies? Such animals could successfully tackle the problem we are discussing if there were enough of them.
Lord Whitty: My Lords, the Government take the matter seriously. The situation in Australia and New Zealand is different from that in the UK. We are part of a single market and the vast majority of goods and people who enter the UK travel from other EU countries. The external EU regime is the important issue here. We have raised with the Commission the need to tighten restrictions in that regard. Our own enforcement measures may indeed benefit from the use of dogs and we intend to give that a trial run. However, it would not be a case of using the same dogs to seek out illegal meat as those that seek out illegal immigrants or drugs. Although that is one aspect of enforcement and detection, it is not perhaps the most important one.
Lord Campbell of Alloway: My Lords—
Lord Mackie of Benshie: My Lords, other meat is still coming into this country. We do not appear to have enough people to check meat that is imported from countries where various diseases exist. Have we now a plan to check these ordinary imports coming in through our ports?
Lord Whitty: My Lords, as regards commercial traffic, there is a full check on the documentation of all imports of meat and meat products. The procedure varies a little according to the provenance of the products concerned, but in general at least one in five is physically checked. There is, therefore, a high level of checking. In addition, there is targeted checking of those products in relation to which intelligence indicates that there might be a problem. There is already, therefore, a high level of checking at the ports of containers used in the supposedly legal trade.
The Duke of Montrose: My Lords, I declare an interest as a trader in livestock. I was glad to note that
the Government have empowered local authority inspectors to stop and search passengers. However, does that extend also to port health authorities? Recently, EU inspectors issued a critical report on the way in which we conducted our hygiene inspections. Do the Government have any plans to direct more vets to that task?
Lord Whitty: My Lords, the points raised by the EU inspectors are being addressed by the Government. The additional powers to search relate to the environmental health officers and port officers.
Lord Campbell of Alloway: My Lords—
The Lord Privy Seal (Lord Williams of Mostyn): My Lords, there was an unfortunate misunderstanding earlier, and I think that we should hear the noble Lord, Lord Campbell.
Lord Campbell of Alloway: My Lords, I apologise for crossing the wires; I did not mean to. I have a very short question. The noble Lord said—or implied—that the Government will do nothing and that they will leave the matter to the prosecuting authorities. Is he aware that that is a profoundly unsatisfactory answer?
Lord Whitty: My Lords, I should have thought that the noble Lord, Lord Campbell, of all people, would understand that it is not the job of the Government to prosecute and that it is their job to ensure adequate resources, deterrence, information and intelligence to minimise the threat of the entry of illegal imports. That is the Government's job. It is the prosecuting authorities who take decisions to prosecute.
Baroness Strange: My Lords, is the Minister aware that Boston airport in America is filled with beagles wearing green coats with "sniffer dog" written on them and that those dogs smell out imported foodstuffs?
Lord Whitty: Yes, my Lords, I am aware of the regime that confronts travellers into the United States. That is clearly part of that country's way of engaging in deterrence. It is also, however, regrettably true that a large amount of illegal meat finds its way into the United States across its frontiers. Even such a regime is not a complete failsafe for keeping out illegal meat.
Commonwealth Development Corporation
2.44 p.m.
Baroness Rawlings asked Her Majesty's Government:
- How far their policy of eliminating poverty dictates their Commonwealth Development Corporation investments.
Baroness Rawlings: My Lords, I thank the Minister for that. This is, I believe, the noble Baroness's first time at the Dispatch Box.
Baroness Rawlings: I therefore congratulate a former colleague from the European Parliament and wish her the best of luck in her new post.
Does the Minister agree that one manner in which CDC Capital Partners might improve its capacity to reduce poverty would be to have greater interface between CDC Capital Partners and DfID officials in the countries in which they work? What is being done to improve the interaction between CDC and DfID employees on the ground?
Baroness Crawley: My Lords, I thank the noble Baroness. It is good to have an opportunity to acknowledge her work and commitment in this area. She is absolutely right. We cannot be complacent about communication between DfID officials and CDC. The Government believe that that communication is very good, but it can always be improved. The noble Baroness will know that DfID employs 35 enterprise development advisers and field managers in poor countries and in the UK and that it currently has a portfolio of project commitments totalling more than £200 million. I agree that we should never be complacent but the arrangement is doing well.
Next Section
Back to Table of Contents
Lords Hansard Home Page