RABIES (Hansard, 20 May 1976)

§ Q3. Mr. Adley
asked the Prime Minister if he will reallocated responsibility so as to make one Minister responsible for coordination of anti-rabies measures.

§ The Prime Minister
That responsibility, in so far as the campaign against rabies in animals is concerned, already rests with my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food.

§ Mr. Adley
I thank the Prime Minister for that answer. I realise that technical matters are handled by the Ministry of Agriculture, but is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Home Office has decided to see a delegation of Members from all parties about the police powers in this connection; that the Customs officers are responsible to the Treasury; and that questions of notification of the regulations for overseas visitors are in the hands of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office? In view of the widespread concern, particularly in coastal constituencies, will the Prime Minister consider giving one Minister, if only temporarily, wider powers than he might normally enjoy to co-ordinate overall the work of dealing with the problems connected with rabies?

§ The Prime Minister
Yes, Sir. I have acquainted myself with a number of the facts on this situation. The hon. Gentleman's constituency is clearly one that would be immediately affected. I understand that a Minister from the Ministry of Agriculture will be present at the meeting with the deputation that the hon. Member will be leading. The various aspects of control must be in the hands of local agencies. Up to now, I am satisfied that there is co-ordination. However, a number of aspects of the problem need to be examined. For example, if I may revert to an earlier Question, I think that we should consider the possibility of making offences under the rabies legislation arrestable. I do not know what answer we should come up with, but that is the kind of issue that I am having examined. I hope that we can find some answers to it. I do not think that any hon. Member is in doubt about the gravity of the matter.

§ Mr. Corbett
In view of the seriousness of the threat of the introduction of the disease here, will my right hon. Friend suggest to my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture that he make a ministerial broadcast and a personal appeal to so-called pet lovers not to take an appalling risk?

§ The Prime Minister
That is a very good suggestion, and I shall pass it on. The broadcast would probably have to be on the BBC overseas service, although clearly people going abroad and returning also need to have this information. A number of matters are being considered, such as suggestions to port officers about directing boats with animals aboard to certain specified moorings. That is the kind of thing that could be done. The Government will certainly take action to draw attention, as far as is possible, to the dreadful consequences of the disease coming to this country.

§ Mr. Costain
Does the Prime Minister appreciate that there are reports of rabies within a 100 miles of my constituency, and that Folkestone and Dover have the biggest passenger traffic of any port in Great Britain? The Minister of Agriculture's responsibility comes in after the disease has broken out, and we must wish to prevent it. Could not the Prime Minister arrange for the local police forces to have special powers of inspection and 1709 to help the Customs and immigration people?

§ The Prime Minister
The police have powers. Questions were asked about them 20 minutes or so ago, and were answered by my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department. Whether they should have more powers is a question to which we are giving consideration. There is a maximum fine of £400 on summary conviction, and on indictment there is the prospect of imprisonment. These are serious penalties and I think that they are adequate. It is now a matter of ensuring that those who try to smuggle in animals are caught.

§ Mr. Raphael Tuck
Does not my right hon. Friend feel that offences might be much more effectively prevented if they were made subject to much more severe penalties—say, a fine of £1,000 or a minimum of five years' imprisonment?

§ The Prime Minister
I am never quite sure where the deterrent ceases to apply. I should not like to go into the question whether more serious penalties would have the consequences that my hon. Friend suggests. It is important that we should alarm people and awaken them to the consequences of the introduction of the disease into this country.

§ Mr. Burden
Does the Prime Minister agree that the many proposals put to him this afternoon indicate the gravity with which the matter is viewed? Will he therefore set up a committee which can act very quickly and can consider publicising the dangers and producing a cohesive programme that can be brought out quickly to deal with them?

§ The Prime Minister
There is a cohesive programme and the departmental responsibilities are properly coordinated. There is no confusion about responsibilities as between the various local agents who are concerned with this matter, whether they be Customs and Excise officials, police, or people from the Department of Health who are concerned about rabies in human beings. Only if we set up a special department, with special agents to deal with the matter, would there be complete co-ordination. I am sure that it is right to leave it to the local 1710 agencies, provided they have proper direction.

§ Mr. Charles Morrison
Does the Prime Minister agree that, however important the measures taken at home may be, it is far more important to ensure that the disease never arrives in this country? As to co-ordination, is the Prime Minister satisfied that enough is being done at foreign ports to reduce the possibility of the disease coming into this country? Does not this emphasise yet again the need for proper consideration of the matter, and proper co-ordination?

§ The Prime Minister
There is proper co-ordination in the matter. The local agencies understand their powers and responsibilities perfectly well.
As to the position in foreign ports, I am not able to give an authoritative answer. I am told that at the end of 1975 the nearest point in France that the disease had reached was about 80 miles from the coast of France, although one or two isolated cases have since been reported a few miles further west. The control measures on the Continent are different from ours, because on the Continent there is an endemic situation.
I agree with the hon. Gentleman that our task is to try to keep the disease as far away as we can. But I regret that we cannot stop people trying to smuggle animals in, except, perhaps, by bringing home to them the serious consequences of their actions.

§ Mr. Cledwyn Hughes
Will my right hon. Friend also bear in mind that one of the strongest recommendations of the Waterhouse Committee, which went into the whole question in great detail, was that the port authorities around our coast should be greatly strengthened? Will he investigate this and ensure that this action is taken?

§ The Prime Minister
I hope that some of these questions will be directed to the Minister of Agriculture. Now that my right hon. Friend has joined me on the Front Bench. I feel like Wellington when Blucher arrived. Perhaps hon. Members will table some of these detailed questions to my right hon. Friend. If they are not satisfied with his answers, I am sure that he will let me know.