Transport of Farm Animals (Hansard, 1 May 2001)

§ Dr. Nick Palmer (Broxtowe)

I beg to move, That leave be given to bring in a Bill to limit the distance that farm animals may be transported in any one-week period. The Bill will do three things: it will reduce animal suffering, it will lower the risk of epidemics and it will restore the market for local abattoirs. A few weeks ago, a senior official of the National Farmers Union in Nottinghamshire said to me that not only politicians but even farmers have learned a great deal about the farming industry in recent weeks. One of the most startling facts that we have all learned is that more than 1 million sheep movements were made, many right across the country, in the days after the first infection of foot and mouth disease. Why so many, and why so far?

The first reason is retailers' insistence that farmers use specified abattoirs. It is not generally realised that many of Britain's big retailers require suppliers to use specific abattoirs, even if they are on the opposite side of the country. If farmers wish to sell to them, they are forced to transport their animals the necessary distance for the convenience of the retailer.

Secondly, there is a large number of middlemen who buy animals speculatively at markets and move them from one market to another, looking for a better price. We can imagine the stress of animals packed into transporters for day after day as the dealer hunts his profit. I am not against profit, but we can reasonably ask ourselves whether that activity, with its cost in animal suffering and human risk, is producing anything worth while. Thirdly, price competition lures farmers into sending their animals across the country to make a marginal saving, even when a local abattoir is still available.

The Bill will empower the Secretary of State to limit the total frequency, time or distance that each animal can travel in any one week. The effects would be to inhibit 752 the trade of middlemen who repeatedly move the same animals and to prevent the longest journeys to abattoirs. Local abattoirs would regain their natural markets, the stress to animals would be substantially reduced and the danger of new epidemics would be lessened. Similar proposals have been made by the Swedish and German Governments at European Union level following studies showing that 10 per cent. of animals transported across Europe are dead on arrival from stress or other causes. I hope that the Bill will promote a readiness in Britain to welcome such moves.

We have a great tradition in Britain of cheap food, and that has done a great deal to promote the interests of the people of the country. However, it is time to consider whether that is necessary in its current absolute form. What is the real price that we are paying? It is an increased risk of epidemics that cost Britain billions when they occur and the suffering of animals, which consumers, when asked, say that they are not seriously willing to accept. The real price is too high.

We must accept that the Bill would increase the price of meat—I estimate that it would do so by 5 per cent. A piece of meat now costing£2 would therefore cost an extra 10p. I have a 10p with me—the price of saving it is a great deal of suffering for animals and an increased risk of epidemics that cost all of us billions of pounds. With the Bill, I should like to invest that 10p in higher standards for the animals' sake and for Britain's sake. I commend the Bill to the House.