| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
I make a plea. Our climate is changing with worrying speed, and we need to be fully prepared for a number of exotic diseases to strike. Animal health, in particular, must be prepared to ask for and receive advice from scientists whose expertise and experience of exotic diseases are acknowledged by their colleagues around the world. If they are prepared to share their knowledge, they should be welcomed with open arms rather than snubbed in the belief that all the expertise is already available in the UK. I bring to mind the way that the late Fred Brown was so badly treated during the 2001 foot and mouth outbreak.
Finally, it is absolutely essential that the Government understand that science should define the policy and not let the policy define the science. By pursuing the latter, the Government pervert the decision-making process and produce policy that, not surprisingly, provokes the distrust and the disrespect of the citizen. Government should also recognise the limits of science.
8 pm
Lord Plumb: My Lords, I, too, congratulate my noble friend Lady Byford on raising this issue. It is a matter of importance and concern to everyone who is interested in the livestock industry. In declaring my interest as a lifelong livestock farmer, I recognise the cost to the industry caused by the appalling error at Pirbright in relation to the foot and mouth outbreak. We now have to deal with bluetongue and avian flu while recognising the other infectious diseases that are concerning the whole of the livestock industry.
I shall concentrate my few remarks on TB. I am old enough to remember the eradication scheme of the 1940s and 1950s. It was a huge success because of co-operation between the farmers, the vets and the Ministry. TB was virtually eliminated throughout the whole of the United Kingdom. We could boast that we had clean herds and TB-free milk for consumers. We followed it up by eradicating brucellosis through a compulsory vaccination scheme. Both schemes were sound as investments and sound in effect. Both were successful. Now, 50 or 60 years later, we should be ashamed to admit that more than 6,500 farms are under restriction.
As my noble friend Lady Byford said, last year 2,800 cattle were slaughtered, at a cost to the taxpayer of more than £90 million. The cost to the farmer is
10 Mar 2008 : Column 1378
Defra’s strategic goal must be to ensure an annual decrease in the impact of the disease. The issue of cattle movements has an important part to play, but the disease will never be controlled without tackling its reservoirs. I refer to the badger population and to other vermin, such as rats, which help the disease to spread. There appears to be a problem with testing. A case was brought to me recently where reactors were not removed from the farm for six weeks, and in one case eight weeks, when of course they should have been removed within seven days.
There are many cases of hardship, too many to mention, involving farmers who cannot sell their stock because of the restrictions. Perhaps I may quote two such examples, or three if I have time. They occurred in Herefordshire, Staffordshire and Carmarthenshire.
The first case involves a young couple farming 189 acres in Herefordshire. Due to the TB restrictions they are carrying the cost of 450 head of cattle, 130 of which should have been sold. The wife is under great pressure. They have a four year-old child, and last month the wife produced a baby daughter. She went into hospital on the Friday and came out with 29 stitches the following Monday so that she could resume work on the farm. They have been pushed heavily into debt. She fields the telephone calls from suppliers demanding payment; npower and BT are pressing them very hard. The supply of animal feedstuffs is a great concern. ARC-Addington, the charitable fund, has sent eight articulated lorry loads of silage and straw, with more help being given this week. Such help can last for only a very short time in such difficult circumstances.
The second case also involves the Addington fund. In 2002 it approved the provision of housing for an elderly couple who are farming in Staffordshire. TB was the main obstacle to their exiting the farm. Six years later, the farm is still under TB restrictions. The husband is now aged 77 and his wife is 75. They are still farming. As tenant farmers their assets are tied up in their stock, but they need to be TB-free to sell up and realise its full potential. There is a similar case in Carmarthen, where a family has been unable to sell its stock since 2002. Apart from the appalling effect that that has had on their family life, their cash flow is moving in the wrong direction. Those are the human problems that exist with this disease. Your Lordships should know what is actually happening on the livestock farms in today’s difficult circumstances.
10 Mar 2008 : Column 1379
8.06 pm
Baroness Masham of Ilton: My Lords, this may be a short debate, but to many people it is an exceedingly important one. I thank the noble Baroness, Lady Byford, for initiating it. I must declare an interest as I have a Highland pony stud and several breeds of sheep.
I start by saying that I was brought up in Scotland and know the ferocity of the Scottish midge, which make the English one pale into insignificance. Mosquitoes and midges have a lot to answer for regarding infectious animal diseases.
Many of us are concerned about the spread of bluetongue disease. I still cannot understand how so many German cows developed bluetongue after being imported into the UK. What is the incubation period, and should not imported stock be quarantined for that period? With tagging and individual numbers, how was it that the wrong cow was killed at a farm at Great Ayton, near Darlington, and the one infected with bluetongue remained free? Surely before killing an animal the infected one should be marked and kept separate. What progress has been made on a vaccination programme?
I would like to spend the short time I have on the infections of equines. First, there is nothing more distressing than to see a good young horse go down with grass sickness. May seems to be the most dangerous month. There are the acute and sub-acute forms, which are invariably fatal, and the chronic cases that occasionally recover with constant nursing. Research has found that the cause is most likely to be a soil-based bacterium called Clostridium botulinum. More research is needed into this toxin in the hope of finding a vaccine. In Belgium a similar condition has been found in dogs and cats.
The equine industry is very important, involving racing, show jumping and the Olympics as well as breeding, showing and riding of all sorts. There are many emerging infectious diseases. Many factors can influence this, including the expanding human population, the international travel of humans, animals and animal products, and climate change. Climate change has the most influence on vector-borne diseases, with disease that was originally confined to tropical countries on the rise in both Europe and around the world. Bluetongue virus is an example of this. Horses are second only to people in terms of volume of global air travel. Therefore, even if a country is geographically remote from exotic diseases, it is still at risk of exposure.
What is the current progress on the specified-type equine exotic diseases—STEED—contingency plan? Are West Nile virus, a zoonotic disease, and African horse sickness, which has a high mortality rate, included in it? This illustrates the importance of having a Minister with responsibility for the horse. I hope that he is working closely with the World Organisation for Animal Health and that he is making zoonotic diseases a priority.
The emergence of diseases such as HIV/AIDS which compromise the immune response and result in severe cases of human cryptosporidioses have led to
10 Mar 2008 : Column 1380
The parasite can infect a wide range of animal species, including humans, cattle, sheep, goats, pigs, horses, deer and camelids. As clinical infections tend to occur most in neonatal animals, cleanliness of animal housing is vital. It is easily spread from livestock to people, so it is important to observe good occupational hygiene and wash hands thoroughly before eating to help prevent transmission of infection.
It is exceedingly difficult to get water tested with so much privatisation and passing the buck. I hope the animal health budget will not be reduced. There are so many important demands on it for the health and safety of both animals and humans.
I end by saying that there are many other infectious animal diseases, such as diseases in rabbits, that concern breeders. Will the Minister give your Lordships an update and a progress report on the use of vaccines to help prevent a wide range of diseases in a wide range of animals?
8.13 pm
Lord Redesdale: My Lords, I, too, thank the noble Baroness, Lady Byford, for initiating this important debate. It is rather unfortunate that we have so many diseases, with such high price tags attached to each of them, to discuss this evening. However, I shall limit my remarks to bluetongue and TB.
I have three questions on bluetongue. If the Minister is not able to answer them, I am happy for him to write to me. My questions concern future policy on a disease that could be eradicated in the short term in this country. However, re-infection from the Continent is always a possibility. First, what advice is Defra giving on the risk to this year’s lambs and spring born suckled calves given that the bluetongue vaccine will be licensed only for stock over four months of age? Does Defra believe that immunity is passed from mothers that have been vaccinated against bluetongue to unvaccinated offspring? Bearing in mind the risk of much greater demand beyond May due to bluetongue, what funding or contingency planning is in place in relation to the National Fallen Stock Company or other bodies to provide an increased level of clearance service for fallen livestock? That last question is relevant only if the outbreak continues and gets worse.
Secondly, TB and badgers is a very difficult issue for many noble Lords and is not as clear-cut as many people who take one side or the other claim. Badgers are a much loved part of our countryside and excite responses in people that few other animals do. I declare an interest as I have three badger setts and a large number of badgers on my estate in Northumberland. However, the love of the British people for badgers does not seem to affect their car
10 Mar 2008 : Column 1381
I received an interesting briefing from the NFU containing two maps of Britain in 1998 and 2004 respectively, indicating where TB outbreaks occurred. It is an indication that we are losing the battle. Indeed, as the noble Lord, Lord Plumb, pointed out, more than 28,000 cattle were affected last year at the not inconsiderable cost of £90 million. As was stated, that has a massive impact on farmers who have to deal with the consequences. We in Northumberland are in the happy position of having badgers and livestock. TB is not a major issue in that county but, of course, the situation may change.
The noble Lord, Lord Krebs, mentioned a cull. A cull has to go hand in hand with biosecurity because TB can easily be passed from herd to herd if biosecurity measures are not put in place. However, these pose difficulties in many cases, especially with farmers in the upland areas being under such financial pressure. Therefore, a cull is not an easy solution. The Minister will throw up his hands in horror when he hears me say that for the past year I have been undertaking what I believe is the largest eradication programme of any vertebrate in this country; namely, of squirrels. I mention this because in a year and a bit we have taken out 15,004 as of this morning. We have had enormous success throughout Northumberland because we have been given access to every part of the landscape. There are only two areas to which we have not been given access, and we received permission to go on to one of those areas today. I am not sure that will be the case with badgers. That will be an interesting issue, if a very large area is to be undertaken. Will it be possible to eradicate setts in every area without the consent of the landowners? I am not sure that that consent would be given. We have worked very hard with landowners to go on to the land but there are going to be areas where it will be very difficult. In that case, is legislation going to be needed?
Regarding the size of the area that we are talking about, the EFRA committee talked about areas that should be, ideally, greater than 265 square kilometres. We have almost cleared Northumberland, which is 2,500 square miles. That is not to say that we do not think that there are small populations that we have not been able to deal with. With badgers, that is a major issue. The problem that we have had—this is learnt from hard experience—is that you can take out vast numbers in an area, but it is the last few squirrels that are the hardest to deal with. For example, in Slaley forest we took more than 3,500 squirrels out of that one woodland. When you have individual squirrels and very small pockets of squirrels, what happens—I think this is happening with the badger populations—is that, as social creatures, they will move great distances to look for other populations to be near. That is probably why when you have a cull in badger populations you see those individuals that you have not dealt with moving very large distances indeed to find other badgers.
10 Mar 2008 : Column 1382
If a cull is to take place, the EFRA report talked about looking for hard or soft boundaries. I do not think that there are hard or soft boundaries in this country. Even if you talk about rivers being a hard boundary, badgers can go just about anywhere. There are large numbers of bridges over rivers. We found that squirrels were almost using them as motorways to go across, and I do not think that would change with badgers, so you are talking about a very large area for a cull. That has its own implications.
My own view is that a cull should be undertaken in certain areas where the situation is at its worst, because we tend to forget in the debate that tuberculosis does not have an unnoticed effect in badgers. It sickens the badger populations, and they also die a horrible death. When we are talking about the eradication of tuberculosis among cattle, we should also be talking about the eradication of tuberculosis among the badger population, because a healthy badger population is also an aim that we should be looking to achieve.
I very much hope that the Government will be looking to work very hard on the oral vaccination that is being worked on in Gloucestershire, I believe, which has had some very effective results there. It is not difficult to find badger setts, and leaving the vaccination in salt licks has been shown to be extremely effective. That could deal with many of the problems. I wish that this was a situation where there was one side or the other that would be an answer to this problem, but I do not believe that is the case.
8.22 pm
Lord Taylor of Holbeach: My Lords, I join in the congratulations that have been offered to my noble friend Lady Byford on securing this debate at so opportune a time. It has been most valuable.
One look at the speakers list will tell us that those noble Lords present constitute the usual suspects on this subject. That means, however, that we across the House share a similar agenda, and I include the Minister in that category. We have been able to discuss this topic with a genuinely shared interest in trying to make improvements to the existing situation, while acknowledging that it is not easy. I declare an interest in my family horticultural and farming business, although the sheep grazing on our farm are owned and looked after by someone else.
If the past 12 months have taught us anything, it is that, at a time when the threat of animal disease is growing even greater, it is important that we tackle the problems of prevention and treatment in a manner that ensures that the remedy is not more expensive and destructive than the infection. My noble friend Lord Plumb emphasised that the losses borne by our livestock producers are real and substantial. It is likely to take a considerable time for the industry to recover.
It is also important that we take whatever steps are necessary to reduce the range of maladies affecting our livestock. The noble Lord, Lord Soulsby, emphasised the role that science can play. Avian flu and bluetongue may be brought by wildlife and therefore be more difficult to prevent, but we can and
10 Mar 2008 : Column 1383
As the noble Countess, Lady Mar, said, we need more effective control of illegal meat imports. The current position suggests that the Government do not take this seriously. At the same time, we must bring an end to the scourge of bovine TB. The Government have a decision to make. The noble Lord, Lord Krebs, graphically described the options available to the Government and the nature of that decision. The noble Lord, Lord Redesdale, referring to the incidence of roadside casualty badgers, brought to mind the fact that, when I was a child, badgers appeared only in Rupertbooks, but now they are everywhere, particularly by the roadside. The noble Lord also emphasised the difficulty of the decision that the Government will have to make. I know that the Minister has his own view. It would be helpful if he could explain his thinking to us, so that we may assimilate his ideas to aid preparation for the action plan that will be announced.
In a Written Answer published in Hansard on 20 November, the Government referred to the stringency of the new commission regulations on animal movements in an area where bluetongue has been confirmed. I am particularly concerned about the situation of pregnant ewes and cattle that need to be moved from a protection zone to birthing facilities elsewhere. Can the Minister tell me whether there are any proposals under discussion to ease the problems of these animals and the farmers who are trying to adhere to the welfare rules, while at the same time earning enough money to stay in business?
In addition, the past six months have seen the emergence of further problem areas associated with movement restrictions. We have an unequal distribution of abattoirs in the UK. Unlike France, where it appears to be a local government responsibility at département level to ensure the provision of adequate slaughterhouses, we are particularly short in certain areas. The whole question of selling animals for store and slaughter has been a serious concern to farmers and auctioneers alike. I have received a regular update from Newark livestock market on the situation. They have benefited enormously from the vector-free period. This window is due to close on 15 March—the Ides of March—and there is much apprehension about the consequences.
This is something that should be dealt with by all the interested parties getting their heads together to work out solutions that avoid unnecessary wastage or massive cost. By “all” I mean to include not only the Government, but opposition parties, supermarkets, livestock markets, farmers’ markets, abattoirs, farmers, vets and all the rest. It may be that the only workable solution is to create a protection zone that covers the whole country.
Several speakers have touched on cost-sharing. My noble friend Lady Byford questioned both the coverage of any such scheme and the nature and
10 Mar 2008 : Column 1384
We, as the Opposition, are prepared to support cost-sharing in principle. We are, however, anxious that the system that is introduced provides an incentive to good husbandry and biosecurity, and a reward for the achievement of excellence. There must be a genuine partnership if cost-sharing is to be accepted by the industry. Not only should the costs be shared, but the system should allow for measures for recovering an element of the cost of dealing with the outbreak of a disease where that outbreak has been caused by some person or agency failing to do their job correctly. It follows that the make-up of the costs to be shared must be clearly enumerated and firmly controlled. It also implies that all parties to the agreement must have both major input to the schemes of disease control for which these charges are made and a substantial role in their monitoring and review.
I am sure that the Minister has been most thoroughly briefed for this debate. None the less, I hope that he has been given some new perspectives and ideas by the contributions that noble Lords have made. It is a most serious topic and I look forward with interest, and not a little hope, to his response.
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |