§ 36. Mr. WATERSONasked the Minister of Agriculture whether he has declined to pay a claim for compensation made by the Pendleton Co-operative Society in respect of carcases condemned after slaughter through foot-and-mouth disease; whether similar claims in respect of carcases condemned after slaughter in the Manchester abattoirs have been paid by the Board of Agriculture; and, if so, what are the grounds for the differential treatment of these respective claims?
The MINISTER of AGRICULTURE (Sir Arthur Boscawen)The answer to the first two parts of the question is in the affirmative. The circumstances of the two cases are, however, quite different. In the Pendleton case the animals were slaughtered in the ordinary course of business, and some of the carcases were subsequently condemned by the local sanitary inspector. The Ministry has no power to pay compensation in such a case. In the Manchester case, foot-and-mouth disease was discovered among live animals awaiting slaughter in the public abattoir. To prevent the disease spreading amongst the large number of animals there, and to secure the early disinfection of the premises, the Ministry entered into an agreement, as an exceptional measure, to pay compensation for any carcases which might be condemned on condition that all the animals were slaughtered immediately. This condition was complied with, and out of the 626 animals which were slaughtered compensation was paid for 13 carcases only.
Sir A. BOSCAWENNot completely, but I am glad to say that last week we only had three outbreaks, compared with 300 in a week a short time ago.
§ Mr. WATERSONIn view of the dissatisfaction, will the right hon. Gentleman be prepared to receive a deputation with regard to this decision? That would probably clear the air.
Sir A. BOSCAWENI do not think so. If I were to receive deputations whenever there was dissatisfaction, I should be doing nothing else.