39. Lieut.-Colonel TODDasked the Minister of Agriculture whether, in the view of his Department, the importation of chilled or frozen meat from the Argentine is a possible source of infection of foot-and-mouth disease in England?
§ Sir G. BOWYERMy right hon. Friend is advised that whilst there is no evidence that the virus of foot-and-mouth disease could remain alive in the flesh of chilled or frozen meat during the transit of such meat from South America to this country, it would be possible for the virus to survive in the bone marrow of such meat.
Lieut.-Colonel TODDIn view of the terrible loss from the slaughter policy, would it not be fair to place an embargo on Argentine meat?
40. Lieut.-Colonel TODDasked the Minister of Agriculture whether the Government have considered the position of farmers and landowners affected 486directly, and indirectly, by foot-and-mouth disease outbreaks, who continued to receive tithe rentcharge demands, and who have no protection against distress being levied upon their implements of husbandry, tools of trade, and stock for failure to meet these demands; and whether he proposes to take any steps in the matter?
§ Sir G. BOWYERAs regards the first part of the question, compensation payable to farmers in respect of an outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease is related solely to the market value at the time of slaughter of any animals which may be slaughtered by direction of the Ministry on account of their being affected with foot-and-mouth disease or of their being exposed in any manner to infection. Such compensation is not directly related to any liabilities. The answer to the last part of the question is in the negative.
Lieut.-Colonel TODDDoes the Minister realise that the consequential losses are far greater than the direct losses due to slaughter?
§ Sir G. BOWYERYes, but I am sure the hon. and gallant Member will realise that the Ministry of Agriculture has no jurisdiction over tithe rentcharge.