§ 39. Sir WALTER MENZIESasked the President of the Board of Agriculture what Acts give the local authorities powers through his Board to make regulations for the movement of cattle; whether these regulations are now necessary; and, if not, when he intends to rescind them? I may state that I put the question down before having heard of the Mullingar outbreak.
§ The PRESIDENT Of the BOARD of AGRICULTURE (Mr. Runciman)Section 22 (34) of the Diseases of Animals Act, 1894, empowers the Board to authorise a local authority to make regulations for any of the purposes of the Act, subject to such conditions as the Board think fit to prescribe, and Article 12 of the Foot-and-Mouth Disease Order of 1896 empowers a local authority to prohibit or regulate the movement of animals into their district with a view to prevent the introduction of the disease under the conditions set out in the Order. The necessity of the regulations depend in some measure upon the local conditions, and under existing circumstances I do not propose to interfere with the exercise of the discretionary power which the local authorities at present possess.
§ Captain MURRAYHas the right hon. Gentleman actually power to rescind these regulations?
§ Mr. RUNCIMANI can only rescind them by rescinding Article XII. of the Order of 1895, which remains in force.
§ Mr. C. BATHURSTIs it the fact that the local authorities have no power to interfere with railway traffic through their areas when they impose an embargo of this sort?
§ Mr. RUNCIMANI take it the hon. Member is referring to the case of Gloucestershire. Gloucester has no power to prevent through traffic passing through their area.
§ Mr. C. BATHURSTI should like to ask what is the rule in regard to all counties in England as regards through railway traffic?
§ Mr. SPEAKERThe hon. Member should put the question down.
§ Mr. GINNELLWill the right hon. Gentleman enforce his embargo against cattle shipped before his new Order was made known in Ireland—cattle now due in England?
§ Mr. RUNCIMANThe Order applies to all animals which may have come from an infected area.
§ Mr. GINNELLEven if shipped before the Order was made known and the cattle are sound?
§ Mr. RUNCIMANThe exact date on which they were shipped does not very much matter. If they are likely to bring disease over the Order must operate against them, naturally.
§ 51. Mr. PATRICK WHITEasked the Prime Minister whether, having regard to the expressed difference of opinion which has existed between two Ministers or His Majesty's Government, the one President of the English Board of Agriculture, the other Vice-President of the Irish Department of Agriculture, and presumably shared by their respective departmental veterinary and official experts, with regard to the restriction imposed on the landing of Irish cattle in England in consequence of the outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease, and having regard to the effects on the cattle trade of Ireland, bringing in its train something little short of national bankruptcy if the restrictions of this year become the normal policy under similar conditions in future, and to promote concerted action between two kindred departments within the United Kingdom charged with administering the same law, and to alleviate the mistrust generated in Great Britain by unfounded statements reflecting on the inspection of animals before shipment from Ireland, and to the magnitude of the interests, affecting both British and Irish agriculturists, involving a turnover of between ten and fifteen millions annually, he will consider the advisability of appointing a non-party committee to receive evidence and report whether the present attitude towards Irish cattle is equitable or necessary, and what regulations might fairly be imposed by one country against the other in the event of an outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease in either?
§ The PRIME MINISTERI have been in communication with my colleagues on this subject, and I have no reason whatever to suppose that the different points of view which they respectively represent cannot be reconciled by the usual ministerial machinery. There is no necessity for the creation of any special tribunal for the purpose.