§ Mr. RUPERT GWYNNEasked whether swine fever had diminished in England during the last three years, and, if so, to what extent; and whether it was diminishing at the present time as the result of the Board of Agriculture's restrictions?
§ Sir E. STRACHEYThe number of outbreaks from swine fever in Great Britain fell from 2,070 in 1908 to 1,652 in 1909 and 1,577 in 1910. During the present year there has been unhappily a recrudescence of the disease, the number of outbreaks confirmed during the twenty-eight weeks ended the 15th instant, having been 1,461, as compared with 1,268, 1,000 and 823 respectively in the corresponding period of 1908, 1909 and 1910.
§ Mr. C. BATHURSTDoes not the serious recrudescence of the disease this year show that the very severe and vexatious restrictions are wholly unjustifiable?
§ Sir E. STRACHEYI do not think necessarily so.
§ Mr. RUPERT GWYNNECan the Board attribute the large increase this year to any special reason?
§ Sir E. STRACHEYThere is no special reason.
§ Mr. R. GWYNNEasked whether any compensation was paid to owners of pigs for financial loss suffered in consequence of the restrictions placed upon their movement, owing to the occurrence of swine fever on their own or on neighbouring premises; and, if not, why no such compensation was paid?
§ Sir E. STRACHEYThe answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. The Board are only empowered to pay compensation for swine slaughtered by their order in the public interest.
§ Mr. R. GWYNNEWill the Board consider the propriety of getting power to pay compensation?
§ Sir E. STRACHEYIt would require legislation.