§ Mr. DrewTo ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many cases are being investigated by her Department for(a) fraudulent claims and (b) the deliberate transmission of foot and mouth disease. [9530]
§ Mr. Morley[holding answer 22 October 2001]: Two claims for compensation in respect of animals slaughtered due to foot and mouth disease are currently being investigated by DEFRA's legal department.
As regards possible cases of deliberate transmission of foot and mouth disease, the Department has investigated three cases and found them to be unsubstantiated. One further case is currently under investigation.
§ Mr. Peter AinsworthTo ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what measures she is taking to ensure animal welfare in areas defined as high risk in relation to foot and mouth disease. [7870]
§ Margaret Beckett[holding answer 15 October 2001]: The Animal Movement Licensing System allows foot and mouth disease susceptible animals to move for commercial and welfare reasons. Limited movement in high risk counties in infected areas is also possible. The arrangements are intended to strike a balance between the commercial and welfare needs of farmers and their animals, and the need to contain and eradicate foot and mouth disease.
§ Mr. WigginTo ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs for what reason further blood tests are carried out in protection zones after blood test results from the infected premises and contiguous cull farms have proved to be negative. [6665]
§ Mr. MorleyMany fool and mouth disease (FMD) infected premises are confirmed on clinical grounds, by the vet on the spot in liaison with vets at DEFRA HQ. Subsequent negative results from blood tests do not necessarily mean that there was no disease on the premises. Blood tests for FMD antibodies are carried out on all farms with sheep and goats within 3 km of infected premises to check for presence of the disease. Blood sampling has to take place at least 21 days after preliminary cleansing and disinfection of the infected premises and this interval should allow time for any infected animals to produce detectable antibodies. A 539W similar procedure was followed in France, Ireland and the Netherlands as part of the process of demonstrating freedom from FMD.
§ David MacleanTo ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what assessment has been made of the(a) safety and (b) marketing in the UK of milk and meat from animals vaccinated against foot and mouth disease. [5251]
§ Mr. MorleyThe Veterinary Medicines Directorate has assessed the foot and mouth disease vaccines that might be used in the UK for safety in relation to the consumer. They concluded that there are no risks to human health associated with vaccination of animals intended for the production of milk or meat for human consumption. This assessment is based on the fact that these vaccines consist of purified, inactivated viruses together with a number of other ingredients which are widely used in other vaccines for animals. The Food Standards Agency has also considered this issue and is satisfied that the use of such a vaccine would not have implications for food safety.
There has been no official assessment on marketing in the UK of milk and meat from animals vaccinated against foot and mouth disease. Information about the disease concerning vaccination against foot and mouth disease can be found on the DEFRA foot and mouth disease website www.defra.gov.uk/footandmouth.
§ David MacleanTo ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what reports she has received of bovine body parts being found in the countryside on land where animals have not previously been slaughtered because of foot and mouth disease. [5614]
§ Mr. MorleyA report was received by DEFRA's Newcastle office that part of a cow's tongue had been found by a gateway on a farm in Northumberland. The Veterinary Officer who inspected the tongue did not consider it to be infected. A report was also received in June by the Leeds office that a decayed tongue was lying in a road. It was collected and disposed of by a Veterinary Officer.
§ Mr. BreedTo ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what plans she has to promote support schemes for those affected by the foot and mouth crisis, in accordance with the twelfth recommendation of the Haskins report. [10452]
§ Alun MichaelWe will shortly respond to both the Haskins report and the report of the Rural Task Force.
Meanwhile, the Government have been actively raising awareness among affected businesses of the financial aid available to help cope with the impact of foot and mouth disease. The Small Business Service has sent out 3.7 million copies of their leaflet "Coping with Foot and Mouth Disease—help for business" via banks, post offices, trade associations, employer organisations, etc. Business advice fact sheets have been posted on DEFRA's website, http://www.defra.gov.uk/, and we have set up help lines. The regional development agencies have also been actively promoting the Business Recovery Fund.
Preliminary results from research by Prism Consulting for the Department in September reveals that 40 per cent. of businesses had sought assistance from an outside organisation—central or local Government, or through the 540W regional development agencies, Business Links etc.—which is an improvement on earlier results. We continue to look at the most effective means to engage the rural business community in order to make sure that assistance gets to those businesses with the most pressing need.
§ Mr. SayeedTo ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs when farmers can continue with normal farming practice after their land has been used for the incineration of livestock as part of the eradication of foot and mouth. [8090]
§ Mr. MorleyMonitoring carried out by the Environment Agency for the Department of Health has confirmed that there is very little risk to human health following the removal of ash from the incineration of carcases. The Food Standards Agency considers that the available results indicate that there is no additional risk to health through the food supply. Farmers may therefore resume farming once the removal of ash has been completed.
§ Mr. SayeedTo ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what assessment the Government have made of pollution of land where incineration of livestock took place as part of the eradication of the foot and mouth epidemic; and if she will make a statement. [8091]
§ Mr. MorleyWhere possible the Government have arranged for ash from the incineration process to be buried on site. This has only occurred following Environment Agency permission in accordance with the Groundwater Regulations. The Government are currently consulting with the Environment Agency on a programme of on-going monitoring of ash burial sites.
In circumstances where the Environment Agency has assessed that ash cannot be buried on site then it has been disposed of at a licensed landfill site.
Monitoring carried out by the Environment Agency for the Department of Health has confirmed that there is very little risk to human health following the removal of ash from the surface of the land.
§ David MacleanTo ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many(a) holdings and (b) other premises in Cumbria (i) refused to give up sheep for the 3 km cull and (ii) still have sheep on their premises. [5256]
§ Mr. MorleyIn total, 375 holdings in Cumbria did not participate in the 3 km cull which ended on 24 May. All premises involved had or were allocated a holding number so no "other premises" were involved. Approximately 242 of these holdings still have sheep on the premises.
§ Paddy TippingTo ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (1) if she will set out the number of payments to farmers following foot and mouth disease of(a) less than £100,000, (b) between £100,000 and £200,000, (c) between £200,000 and £300,000. (d) between £300,000 and £400,000, (e) between £400,000 and £500,000, (f) between £500,000 and £600,000, (g) between £600,000 and £700,000, (h) between £700,000 and £800,000, (i) between £800,000 and £900,000, (j) between £900,000 and £ 1 million, and (k) in excess of £1 million; [7654]
541W(2) how many individual payments have been made to farmers as a consequence of foot and mouth disease. [7668]
§ Mr. Morley[holding answer 15 October 2001]: The numbers of individual payments made to farmers since the beginning of the foot and mouth disease outbreak are as follows:
Amount Number of payments £0 to £99.999 10,180 £100,000 to £199,999 1,257 £200,000 to £299,999 603 £300,000 to £399,999 364 £400,000 to £499,999 223 £500,000 to £599,999 141 £600,000 to £699,999 92 £700,000 to £799,999 58 £800,000 to £899,999 43 £900,000 to £999,999 29 £1,000,000 and over 68 Total 13,058 The number of payments does not equate to the number of infected premises since the Department has, in some cases, made separate payments for animals slaughtered, and for seized or destroyed items.