HL Deb 24 January 1968 vol 288 cc308-11

2.12 p.m.

THE DUKE OF ATHOLL

My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

[The Question was as follows:

To ask Her Majesty's Government what considerations were taken into account in arriving at their decision not to extend the ban on the import of meat from countries where foot-and-mouth disease is endemic until after the proposed Committee of Inquiry has reported, and, if the Committee recommends such a ban, whether it will be reimposed.]

LORD BESWICK

My Lords, the suspension of imports applies to all countries except those few where foot-and-mouth is unknown or which have a long history of freedom from the disease. Its purpose is to reduce to the minimum the risk of any new primary outbreak while the present emergency is being brought under control. I cannot anticipate what the Government might do as a result of recommendations the proposed Committee of Inquiry might make.

THE DUKE OF ATHOLL

My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that we incurred a certain amount of odium when we put on this ban, and we shall probably get little gratitude when it is lifted, as one seldom gets gratitude for lifting a ban, and if it has to be reimposed as a result of the report of the Committee of Inquiry we shall incur more odium with countries such as the Argentine where foot-and-mouth disease is endemic? Is the noble Lord further aware that I can say from personal knowledge that the farmers in Scotland are extremely worried by the period between the lifting of the present ban and the reporting of the Committee which his right honourable friend is going to set up as soon as this outbreak has been got under control?

LORD BESWICK

My Lords, the noble Duke is quite right, of course. There was odium when the ban was imposed, and there will be odium when the ban is lifted. There is a balance of odium here, and the Government have to take the right decision. But it would be wrong of me to say what will be done as a result of the findings of this Committee.

LORD OAKSHOTT

My Lords, with regard to the Committee mentioned in my noble friend's Question, can the noble Lord yet say what sort of Committee or Commission his right honourable friend has in mind to set up? Secondly, would he consider suggesting to his right honourable friend that it would be a good idea to set up the secretariat of the proposed Commission at once, to build up a case history of what has happened over the last few months while memories are still fresh?

LORD BESWICK

My Lords, I cannot say precisely what the constitution of the Committee will be, except that it is unlikely to be a Royal Commission. I hope that the Committee will be established rather earlier than was at one time thought likely—that is to say, that it will be set up before the present period of outbreaks is completely over. As for the very useful suggestion made by the noble Lord about setting up a secretariat, he will realise that a good deal of work is now being done to collect the necessary data.

LORD SANDYS

My Lords, are the Government aware that the ban on the import of meat should also carry with it a ban on the import of bone, because the virus is able to exist for a longer period in frozen bone? Would he comment on that?

LORD BESWICK

My Lords, I cannot add to what I have already said in this House in reply to a similar question put by the noble Lord. At the moment the ban is complete: it includes both bone and meat. For the time being that is the position.

LORD OGMORE

My Lords, in view of the urgency of this matter and the fact that a great deal of information is to hand, why not set up the Committee straight away?

LORD BESWICK

My Lords, one reason why the Committee has not been set up is fairly obvious. Most of the energy of the experts available is directed to bringing the disease under control.

THE DUKE OF ATHOLL

My Lords, will the noble Lord answer the first part of my Question in rather more detail? He has not told us what were the considerations in arriving at the decision lift the ban, or the decision that the ban should last only for the duration of the present outbreak, and not until after the Committee had reported.

LORD BESWICK

I feel that the House knows what the balance of considerations is. On the one hand, there are the opinions of those who are concerned with the production of meat in this country. Their feelings are understandable, and noble Lords have expressed them in this House. I share the feelings which the noble Duke has. On the other hand, there are also the interests concerned with the consumer side. It is essential to maintain our relations with these producing countries overseas, and it is very difficult to pin the blame publicly on any one country outside, when there is no real evidence that such blame can be attached.

THE DUKE OF ATHOLL

My Lords: there may not be absolute conclusive evidence but surely there is a certain amount of evidence, in that the United State and Ireland, which have operated these bans for many years, have not had any outbreaks of foot-and-mouth disease, I believe, since the 1920s.

LORD BESWICK

Yes, my Lords, I would accept that that proves conclusively that the infection does not come from those countries. It does not prove, however, that the infection may not come from other countries.

LORD CRAWSHAW

My Lords, in view of what the noble Lord says about not upsetting those countries where there is this disease, would he agree that one approach might be to leave the ban on for the moment and to say to these countries that it is not their meat, as such, to which we object, but the virus that comes with it, and that when they eradicate foot-and-mouth disease from their livestock we shall be happy to have their meat again?

LORD BESWICK

My Lords, the noble Lord is suggesting that the control of imported meat might be improved, and I believe that this is a matter which would merit some further consideration. Indeed, I think I can say that such consideration is being given.