HL Deb 27 March 1924 vol 56 cc1147-53

LORD STRACHIE rose to call attention to the reported statement in The Times of the chief scientific adviser of the Ministry of Agriculture in regard to foot-and-mouth disease, and to ask His Majesty's Government what is the present state of the outbreak which the Ministry seems unable to get under control; and to move for Papers. The noble Lord said : My Lords, I wish to call your attention, first of all, to a statement made by Sir Daniel Hall, as reported in The Times of yesterday, in reference to the policy of slaughter. The Times says this:— At a meeting at Ollerton, North Notts, Sir Daniel Hall, chief scientific adviser to the Board of Agriculture, said the policy of slaughter in stamping out foot-and-mouth disease answered very well for quite a long period, but he had doubts now as to whether they could go on with that method. They might be driven to some other method, possibly isolation. He suggested that farmers should as far as possible avoid bringing new stock on to farms, as there was a great danger in railway transport. I think the House will agree that that is a very strong statement to have been made, but my criticism of this statement is that if it were authorised by the Minister of Agriculture it means that the policy of slaughter, as a means of getting rid of foot-and-mouth disease, is very likely going to be abandoned by the Government.

I hold in my hand extracts from the Journal of the Ministry of Agriculture for the present month. In that journal are reported extracts of speeches by the Minister. The Minister of Agriculture, on February 18, said this: The slaughter policy has been called into question and very naturally is a subject of great public interest. The Ministry has maintained the policy of eradication by the immediate slaughter of all infected animals. That policy was subjected to an exhaustive review two years ago by a Committee of which Mr. Pretyman, formerly Member for Chelmsford, was Chairman, and that Committee reported on the whole strongly in favour of the policy. Then there is another extract, in which the Minister said : Despite the heavy cost which the slaughter policy involved two years ago and the still greater cost now, it ha-s never been in question, whether the policy of mere isolation is not a failure compared with our policy. From that it seems perfectly clear that the views of the Minister were entirely opposed to the statement of Sir Daniel Hall, that the policy of slaughter was probably going to be abandoned.

To my mind it is a very serious matter indeed, because it is also pointed out in this journal that, having abolished the policy of slaughter and adopted the policy of isolation, the annual loss to France is something like £5,000,000 a year. It is true that slaughter has cost us £3,000,000, but even if you add to that another million, by which we hope to got rid entirely of the disease, we shall still not have to spend £5,000,000 a year on isolation. We know that all the great breeding societies in this country, the Royal Agricultural Society and, in fact, every agricultural society of any importance, have emphatically declared in favour of slaughter as against isolation. Therefore I cannot understand why there should be this sudden volte face on the part of the Ministry of Agriculture which seems about to take place.

I should next like to refer to the general position of foot-and-mouth disease in this country. The position is very serious, indeed, and I have put a Question on the Paper with regard to it. I see that in The Times of yesterday it was stated that nearly 100,000 cattle had been destroyed and nearly 40,000 sheep, and that the total outbreaks since August last numbered nearly 3,000. That condition is very serious indeed, and I think we might fairly ask the Government what they are doing to try to put a stop to these continued outbreaks. I think we are entitled to ask them exactly what is the position at the present moment, and whether they have any new principle in view additional to slaughtering. Perhaps I might say that I asked that the questions I intended to put might be brought to the notice of the Lord President of the Council. I am perfectly aware that the Lord President of the Council is well qualified to deal with these questions, but still he is in a very different position from the Under-Secretary or the Minister himself, because he cannot know all the details as they know them. I asked the noble and learned Lord whether in the view of the Ministry it might be desirable to have a stand- still Order for a fortnight or three weeks, so that there shall be no movement of cattle at all, and that all the ports shall be shut up and no cattle brought in from overseas. The second question which I asked him to consider was whether such an Order, if issued, should only apply to store cattle and not to fat stock, because, of course, there is not the same danger from fat stock, which are taken to the market and slaughtered.

I notice that whenever there is an outbreak near any port that port is at once closed, and no cattle are allowed to be brought into it. That is rather curious, and it rather looks as if they thought there might be some connection between outbreaks in this country and imported cattle. I should also like to ask whether it is the case that the Ministry are quite satisfied that there has been no foot-and-mouth disease brought over from Ireland lately. I think probably that is the case, but I should also like to know whether the Irish Free State Government have made an offer to the Ministry of Agriculture for the latter to send over experts to Ireland in order to investigate and ascertain for themselves that the Free State is quite free from foot-and-mouth disease. If that offer has been made I think it is desirable that it should be accepted, because I know that among agriculturists there is a feeling—I think wrongly—that foot-and-mouth disease does exist in Ireland, and it would therefore be a great satisfaction to them to be told officially that it does not exist.

I am informed that in Cheshire, where the outbreak has been so serious, upon those farms where cattle have been destroyed the farmers are being allowed to sell off roots and hay. If that is so, it ought to be done under very careful restrictions indeed as to seeing that there are means of disinfection, and of keeping tally of where the roots and hay are taken, so that if there is an outbreak it may be possible to trace it in the future. I should also like to know whether the Ministry will reconsider their decision to refuse the appeal of the Royal Agricultural Society and the Central Chamber of Agriculture that in view of this very serious outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease all hay and straw coming into this country used for packing purposes should be destroyed when the goods are unpacked at the port, or, better still, as in the Irish Free State, no goods should come in packed in hay or straw. There is no difficulty in this matter. At the present moment America insists on all goods coming into that country being packed, not in hay or straw but in wood wool, which, I am informed, is just as cheap. The Irish Free State has adopted that system.

There is another matter which is exercising agriculturists very much. They are very doubtful whether the railway companies are really disinfecting the trucks properly. I have been told of cases where trucks, out of which animals have been taken, have been disinfected merely with old lime, lime that had been lying about for weeks, or even months. It is very doubtful whether there is any adequate disinfection in such a case. I am informed that when D.O.R.A. was in force it was insisted that the railway companies should use, not merely whitewash but a very strong antiseptic, such as chlorate of lime, which would be much more effective. I suggest to the Government that, as regards all these points, it is very necessary that they should sec what can be done to strengthen the present position. I am sure the Lord President will agree with me that the present situation is very serious indeed. Notwithstanding all the efforts of the Ministry, which I am quite ready to recognise, if you take the country as a whole the position is serious, and they have not been able really to grapple with it and to get the disease under control. Unfortunately, we cannot take up the newspaper now without seeing that there are fresh outbreaks. The disease is breaking out in new districts, and even in those districts which were said to have been freed of the disease.

THE LORD BISHOP OF NORWICH

My Lords, may I call attention to another point in connection with this slaughter of cattle—namely, what is going on in our part of the country, where, in many districts, animals can only be sent to market on condition that they are slaughtered within 96, and in some cases 48, hours, and, in the event of no sale taking place, cannot be returned to the farms? This state of affairs gives rise to "rings." A group of buyers, or cattle dealers, or butchers, form a "ring" at the market, and by an arrangement between themselves as to bidding are able to buy these animals at prices which mean heavy losses to the farmers. As thing are, the farmer has no remedy, because he cannot take the cattle back to his farm. He must accept whatever prices are dictated by the "ring." There are some agriculturists who are of opinion that this state of affairs might be remedied by some form of voluntary grading and the selling of cattle by weight. Your Lordships will forgive me for intervening on this, which is comparatively a small question compared with the matters to which the noble Lord, Lord Strachie, has alluded.

LORD PARMOOR

My Lords, I am sine we are glad that the noble Lord, Lord Strachie, has come back to the House in order to help us again in these agricultural questions. We know the reason of his absence, but while he was away the Diseases of Animals Act was passed through this House. I think I was the only person present, except the noble Viscount on the Woolsack, when I moved the Second Reading, but a great many of those questions which the noble Lord has raised were dealt with by me in considerable detail. If the noble Lord would not mind looking at the OFFICIAL REPORT, he will find some light, at any rate, thrown upon the questions to which he has referred to-day.

I think there has been a misunderstanding as regards the speech of Sir Daniel Hall, and the noble Lord may have noticed that in The Times this morning a correction was made of the summarised report which appeared yesterday. The report of Sir Daniel Hall's remarks is said to have been a complete misapprehension of what he said. They were, directed towards showing that slaughter is the only policy available which could be trusted to rid the country of foot-and-mouth disease. I think that is the view of the noble Lord himself. It is certainly the view of the Ministry, and it was the view, I believe, put forward by Sir Daniel Hall in that speech. The matter was corrected by Sir Daniel Hall himself in The Times this morning.

As regards the questions which the noble Lord has asked me, he very kindly supplied them to me yesterday, and I can give the answers. The Ministry has received no offer from the Irish Free State to have an investigation such as the noble Lord refers to, but it has no reason to think that the Irish Free Stats would not agree to such an investigation, if desired. On the other hand, the Ministry has had ample means of investigating the question of whether foot-and-mouth disease exists in Ireland, or not, and has arrived at the conclusion that, having regard to the definite evidence available from the thousands of animals which hive arrived at our ports, been detained there, and subjected to the closest examination, it is not possible that foot-and-mouth disease is being brought into this country by the trade from Ireland in animals.

With reference to another point raised by the noble Lord, no hay, straw, or other material is allowed to be moved off an infected place, in Cheshire or elsewhere, until the infected place has been disinfected. When such a place has been disinfected, and is ready for freedom, it would be an unnecessary hardship to forbid the owner to dispose of Iris hay and straw. With regard to the railway companies, they are bound by Order to cleanse trucks and loading docks after they have been used for animals. It may sometimes happen, and the Ministry thinks it does sometimes happen, that old lime instead of new lime is used. The railway companies have been regularly circularised about the importance of the cleansing and disinfection of trucks and loading docks, and the Ministry has appointed a special corps of inspectors, whose, exclusive duty it will be to visit the cleansing depots for trucks, and the various loading docks of importance throughout the country, with a view to reporting on how the Ministry's Order is being carried out, and where necessary, to direct adequate observance of the provisions of the Order. The Ministry has been in consultation with the railway companies as to improvements in the existing regulations and a new Order dealing with disinfection of trucks is now in course of preparation. That was a matter which was also dealt with under the Diseases of Animals Bill.

As regards the question of stopping hay and straw used for packages imported into this country, this has many times received the attention of the Ministry. Obviously great inconvenience and loss to trade in general would arise from stopping the use of such material, but notwithstanding the fact that the importance of packing material as a method whereby infection might be conveyed to this country has received the closest attention for years, the Ministry has been unable to correlate such material with initial outbreaks of foot-and-mouth disease. The same result was come to by the Committee which specially dealt with that matter.

As regards the stand-still Order, the answer is that that question is receiving the immediate and serious consideration of the Minister, but it presents many difficulties, and it is impossible to say at the moment what, if any, action will be taken. I am told, generally, that the outbreaks are getting more under control and that the general outlook is much better than it was.

In regard to the point raised by the right rev. Prelate, that is a matter which I will bring to the notice of the Ministry. I have no knowledge of the conditions to which he refers.