§ 2.48 p.m.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government how many cases of reinfection of accredited herds have taken place in Ayrshire; how many farms have gone out of the scheme for this reason, and how figures compare with similar heavily stocked areas.]
§ LORD MOWBRAY AND STOURTONMy Lords, of the 577 accredited herds in Ayrshire, reactors were found in 60 herds. Three herds were withdrawn from the scheme. Comparisons with similar heavily stocked areas are:
- Gloucestershire—231 accredited herds, 4 re-infected, none withdrawn.
- Wiltshire—236 accredited herds, 21 re-infected, none withdrawn.
- Sussex—479 accredited herds, 35 re-infected, I withdrawn.
LORD ROWALLANMy Lords, is it not most extraordinary that 60 herds (that is, over 10 per cent. of the total) which at great expense have been cleared of this disease should be reinfected through no fault of their owners, but due to the fact that the Government refused to accept advice and take any steps to alleviate the situation? The feeling in Ayrshire is one of frustration—
EARL JELLICOEMy Lords, I feel that I must ask the noble Lord to pursue his supplementaries by way of interrogation.
§ LORD MOWBRAY AND STOURTONMy Lords, this figure of 60 herds relates to a period of four years since these schemes were started in 1967. I am happy to be able to tell the House that of those 60 herds, 34 have now been restored. As the House is well aware, the Government are of the view that we must go ahead through eradication areas which will then give safe areas from which the stock can be replaced in infected areas. The noble 803 Lord's county of Ayrshire is due for an eradication area to start compulsorily in November 1973, and we hold that we could be on the verge of a breakthrough.
LORD ROWALLANMy Lords, there seems to be a complete misunderstanding of the facts. A herd which is re-infected may cost the owner literally thousands of pounds.
§ LORD MOWBRAY AND STOURTONMy Lords, with very great respect to the noble Lord, once you have been accredited you are able to insure your cattle. The Department of Agriculture in England and Wales and the corresponding Department for Scotland have done everything possible to encourage farmers to re-insure against the risk. Any farmer can get the carcase value of about £60 when his animal has died. It would only cost him 75p a year to insure for another £100. If you are accredited you get £6.50 per dairy cow, assuming there is a milk yield of 800 gallons; so it is only 75p out of £6.50 per year which has to be expended on insurance. If you have a beef herd you get £5 per beast. So, with great respect, it really is not prudent for a farmer not to be covered. Any farmer who has lost a large sum of money has nobody but himself to blame.
LORD ROWALLANMy Lords, that answer will spread dismay throughout the whole of the farming community.
§ LORD MOWBRAY AND STOURTONWith respect, it should not spread dismay. If you are accredited you gain a certain advantage with the insurance company. I repeat that the cost is 75p per beast.
§ BARONESS SUMMERSKILLMy Lords, as brucellosis is such a serious disease can the noble Lord tell me why a farmer with an accredited herd is legally protected against an irresponsible neighbour who fails to maintain his fences, whereas another farmer under the same scheme, now seeking to establish an accredited herd, is denied this protection?
§ LORD MOWBRAY AND STOURTONMy Lords, these are matters which we are now discussing with the Farmers' Union.
§ LORD BESWICKMy Lords, rather than go into detail about reinsurance. which really is not the point at all, can the noble Lord say what investigation there has been into the source of infection? Can he say what extra steps, if any, have been taken to protect those who have cleaned their herds?
§ LORD MOWBRAY AND STOURTONMy Lords, the number taking advantage of the voluntary scheme is increasing every day and we hope that this will continue— that the rolling stone will gather more moss.
§ LORD BESWICKMy Lords, would the noble Lord be good enough to answer the first part of my question, as to whether any investigation has been made as to the source of the infection?
§ LORD MOWBRAY AND STOURTONNo, my Lords. This is a continuing inquiry and the resources of the Department are continuously engaged on it.
LORD NUNBURNHOLMEMy Lords, in view of the fact that islands in Scotland and the Isle of Wight are the first areas to be eradicated, may I ask what steps are being taken to ensure that animals coming into this country from accredited herds in those islands do not mix with infected animals?
§ LORD MOWBRAY AND STOURTONMy Lords, it is in a farmer's interest, when he has got his herd accredited and clean, to keep it that way. His self-interest should help him to do that.
§ BARONESS SUMMERSKILLMy Lords, is it not a fact that pens which have been infected when, for instance. taking animals from an island in Scotland to the mainland, are not disinfected before the clean animals are taken back to the same farm?
§ LORD MOWBRAY AND STOURTONMy Lords, I am not sure that I fully understand the noble Baroness's point; but I think that any farmer who has his own interests at heart is not going to bring in any infected animals.
§ BARONESS SUMMERSKILLMy Lords, I am talking about the infected pens on the boat, which do not belong to the farmer. Infected animals are taken from the islands to the mainland—I 805 understand the pens are called lairages—and then these pens are used when bringing clean animals back. It seems to be nobody's duty to disinfect the pen which has already been infected by the infected animal that was taken to the mainland.
§ LORD MOWBRAY AND STOURTONMy Lords, if I may, I would like to go into that question further and write to the noble Baroness.
EARL JELLICOEMy Lords, I very much hesitate to come between the rolling stones and the moss on this matter, but we have a very important debate before us and I hope that my noble friends will forgive me if I suggest to your Lordships that we should press on to the next Question.