HC Deb 15 February 1967 vol 741 cc603-6
20. Mr. Monro

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he has completed his inquiries into the recent outbreak of foot-and-mouth dis- ease in Northumberland; and if he will make a statement.

Mr. Pearl

I placed in the Library on 3rd February a report on the diagnosis of the initial outbreaks. My inquiries into slaughtering procedure are nearly complete and I shall make a statement as soon as possible.

Mr. Monro

Is the Minister aware that the British public views the allegations of great cruelty in the slaughter of these unfortunate animals as a reflection on the Minister? Will he hold a public inquiry, which on 15th November he refused?

Mr. Peart

I think the hon. Member is exaggerating the matter. I said I would look into the allegations, I will make a statement, certainly. I gave that promise.

Viscount Lambton

Would the Minister not agree that he is now holding an inquiry? If he is holding one in private, as stated by the Under-Secretary in the House of Lords, what are the arguments against holding it in public?

Mr. Peart

I have announced that I would hold this inquiry. The National Farmers' Union too, is involved in this and has been making investigations. As soon as I have completed all my inquiries, I will make a statement and lay all the material before the House. We are conducting other inquiries affecting other matters, but I believe that this is the right procedure for inquiring into the allegations of cruelty.

Mr. Stodart

Would the right hon. Gentleman accept the fact that we appreciate the difficulty of slaughtering as efficiently and humanely on individual farms as in fully equipped slaughterhouses? In view of the allegations which have been made, with names attached to them, in the newspapers, does not the right hon. Gentleman think that it would be for the good of his own Department if the inquiry were held not only publicly but by an independent assessor?

Mr. Peart

I have said that there had been allegations of cruelty. I think there have been exaggerations. Nevertheless, I have asked my Department to look into this. Added to that, there is a special investigation which has been held by a county branch of the National Farmers' Union. The N.F.U. headquarters are looking into this. All this I will consider. I will examine the information and, as I have said. I will make a statement to the House and inform the House fully of what I have found.

Mr. Manuel

Can my right hon. Friend indicate to the House that there is a very complete and close liaison with the Secretary of State for Scotland in connection with this matter? Can he further indicate what watch is being kept on our main Scottish rivers, and the English rivers, in order to avoid—[HON. MEMBERS: "Wrong question."]——

Mr. R. W. Elliott

Would the right hon. Gentleman appreciate that those of us who come from the area concerned recognise that there is an obvious outlet for exaggeration in circumstances of this sort, but that some of these complaints have come from most responsible people? Does he not agree that it is only reasonable that we should have a full public inquiry into these strong allegations?

Mr. Peart

I have said that I would make a statement. It is true that responsible people have praised the work which has been done to combat very effectively, under difficult circumstances, an outbreak which could have extended even further. I am glad that tribute has been paid to the veterinary officers and others concerned. Where there have been cases of cruelty, I have said that I would add a specific inquiry. I have announced that I will make a statement to the House.

Dame Irene Ward

Can I have a go?

Mr. Stodart

The right hon. Gentleman has undertaken to make a statement. This is, of course, as it should be. But particularly as the National Farmers' Union has shown a slight reluctance to publish certain parts of its report, does he not realise that this adds to the slight concern about the matter and that a statement is not enough—that we should have an independent inquiry for everyone's benefit?

Mr. Peart

The hon. Member should wait for my statement. He asked me to make it. I said I would, and I will do so.

Dame Irene Ward

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether this would be a case to send to the Parliamentary Commissioner, or have his powers been so clipped that he would not be able to inquire into it? I think it would be a jolly good idea. We would then get an independent inquiry.

Mr. Peart

I am sure that the Ombudsman would not be the person to conduct this inquiry. The hon. Lady, whom I respect, is wrong on this occasion. I will make a statement and I hope she will listen to the statement when I make it.

26. Mr. Wingfield Digby

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what has been the total cost to public funds of the recent series of outbreaks of foot-and-mouth disease.

Mr. John Mackie

All payments have not yet been made, but compensation for animals slaughtered in outbreaks since July, 1966, paid, or to be paid, amounts to £1,217,667. Costs of disposal of car-cases, disinfection, and other compensatory payments are estimated at £140,000 and valuers' fees at £9,000.

Mr. Digby

I accept that this distressing policy of slaughter is probably the best, but can the Parliamentary Secretary say how the cost of this outbreak is likely to compare with the cost of earlier outbreaks?

Mr. Mackie

I could not give the figures for particular outbreaks without notice, but in 1957–58 the total cost was £1,573,000 and in 1960–61 it was £2,644,000.