The Chairman of Committees (Lord Brabazon of Tara): My Lords, I have to notify the House, in accordance with the Royal Assent Act 1967, that the Queen has signified her Royal Assent to the following Acts:
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Lord Whitty): My Lords, we are developing a GB-wide livestock register for registering cattle and other farmed livestock species and recording their movements. This register will incorporate the existing functions of the cattle tracing system and continue to provide a full electronic record of cattle births, deaths and movements. The livestock register will build on the measures already in place to enhance the existing cattle tracing system and promote improved electronic uptake.
Lord Livsey of Talgarth: My Lords, will the Minister note the urgent conclusions and recommendations of the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee in its report Identifying and tracking livestock in England? It concluded that one in seven cattle were "lost in the system", which means that those cattle cannot be found. It also concluded that the current cattle tracing systems are more expensive and less
22 Jul 2004 : Column 334
efficient than those in other EU states. It also identified £16 million of savings, and found that the present system is bureaucratic and places a burden on farmers, involving triple handwritten entries. At present there are 1.2 million unresolved anomalies in the system, and the current IT system has three components. Does the Minister accept that the Public Accounts Committee states that markets have a pivotal role and that a fully electronic system should be implemented? Can he say when implementation will happen?
Lord Whitty: My Lords, I accept the careful analysis of the Public Accounts Committee on these issues but not always the rhetoric of its chairman. The noble Lord's repetition of the term "lost" is an exaggeration of what the Public Accounts Committee found. It found that there were gaps in the records amounting to that number of cattle, but that does not mean that those cattle were lost either currently or in the system. The numbers also included relatively recent movements which would not have been recorded, and even that number has decreased substantially.
I acknowledge that there are serious faults in the cattle tracing system. Its heavy reliance on paper information at various points from farmers adds to the burden on farmers and the inefficiency of the system. That is why we are trying to move to a wider livestock register and a fully electronic system. But when proposing an absolutely electronic system, one has to bear in mind that less than one-third of farmers currently have electronic expertise. A two-way system is required for the scheme to work effectively.
Lord Whitty: Yes, my Lords. The issue was that, in virtually all cases, there was a gap in the records at some point from the livestock's date of birth until now. By now, however, the vast majority could have been found. Even so, for the purposes of traceability and disease control, it is not an adequate situation.
Lord Whitty: My Lords, there are still restrictions on movements. They have been reduced substantially compared with the aftermath of the foot and mouth outbreak. Farmers are supposed to record the movement of cattle through the cattle tracing service. The enforcement of actual movements is a local authority responsibility.
Baroness Byford: My Lords, I follow my noble friend's question. It is a very serious situation that these cattle are untraceable, and there will be a problem if disease breaks out. The Minister should acknowledge that. More directly, in response to a
22 Jul 2004 : Column 335
Question that I asked him, the Minister said that the IT projects would not be available until 2006 or 2007. Is he not concerned at the delay? What is its cause?
Lord Whitty: My Lords, the cattle tracing system is fairly substantial and it takes time to move to a full livestock system. It is not sensible to cut corners on such IT systems. The issue is not untraceability but inadequate total records. Although that could be a disease control problem, it would not be a problem in controlling an immediate outbreak if the records were from some time ago. Of course any error is deeply regrettable and adds to control problems.
Lord Livsey of Talgarth: My Lords, does the Minister acknowledge the importance of the need for supermarkets and consumers to know where their beef, for example, comes from? Surely supermarkets could pay for, and the markets could operate, a proper IT system from the field to the plate.
Lord Whitty: My Lords, supermarkets are increasingly operating their own traceability systems and have greatly raised the status of such systems among their suppliers. I do not think that we could ask them to maintain these systems beyond their own supply chain. They have certainly already made an improvement themselves.
Lord Christopher: My Lords, I hope that we do not give supermarkets more power than they have already. Beyond that, however, I wonder whether we are asking ourselves the right question. I do not underestimate the importance of records, but the extent of livestock movement in Britain seems greater than it has ever been. I wonder about the need for it. Is it higher than in Europe? Why is it happening? Has any research been done?
Lord Whitty: My Lords, I find that in this House we rarely ask ourselves the right question. It is true that, as became very apparent during the foot and mouth epidemic, many livestock movements occur uniquely in this country, and that applies particularly to sheep movements. There are far more sheep movements in this country between farm and supermarket buyer and between markets than there are in other countries. Although they have been reduced post foot and mouth, there is still a substantial number of them, including long-distance ones. The whole food chain must address that issue for reasons of animal welfare and disease control and for environmental factors.
Baroness O'Cathain: My Lords, can the Minister confirm whether BT offered to put a computer in every farm in the country but Defra turned down the offer? Surely if farmers could be brought on board to try to register all cattle, it would relieve Defra and the Government from an IT commitment. As I have said many times in this House, the Government are not exactly the best people for running IT systems.
Lord Whitty: My Lords, I am not aware of any such specific offer from BT, but over the past few years
22 Jul 2004 : Column 336
there has been a significant number of schemes offering farmers IT equipment and training. Even so, the take-up has been relatively low. That definitely needs to be addressed by industry and government.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Health (Lord Warner): My Lords, the Nursing and Midwifery Council sets the entry requirements for pre-registration nursing and midwifery training and is the independent statutory regulator. I understand that, from August 2004, the council has reviewed the entry requirements for pre-registration nursing and midwifery education. Applicants must provide evidence of literacy and numeracy skills, good health and good character. Higher education institutions must ensure that applicants have met the above entry requirements.
|Next Section||Back to Table of Contents||Lords Hansard Home Page|