§ Mr. BreedTo ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many appeals have been(a) heard and (b) upheld against (i) livestock culls and (ii) contiguous culls since 20 February 2001. [37795]
§ Mr. Morley[holding answer 28 February 2002]: We are aware of 131 cases where animal owners challenged decisions to slaughter livestock, of which 105 were appealing against contiguous culls. Of the 131 cases, 29 were upheld, 28 of which were appeals against contiguous culls. We are currently seeking data from DEFRA's offices so that a definitive list of all appeals against livestock culls can be compiled.
Four of the 131 appeals were heard in court, of which three were against contiguous culls. Two of the four were upheld; one was an appeal against a dangerous contact cull and the other was against a contiguous cull. The successful appeal against a contiguous cull subsequently became an infected premise.
§ Mr. BeithTo ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs whether a request was made to Northumberland county council on behalf of her Department to close the road to the Hemscott Hill site during(a) the burning of carcases on that site and (b) the removal of ash from the site. [39792]
§ Mr. Morley[holding answer 4 March 2002]: Yes, a request was made by the Department to Northumberland county council to close a section of road at Hemscott Hill during (a) the burning of carcases and (b) the removal of ash from Hemscott Hill burning site.
§ Malcolm BruceTo ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will list the criteria for a confirmation of foot and mouth disease; and whether the criteria for identifying an infected premises have changed since the last case in the UK. [39510]
§ Mr. Morley[holding answer 1 March 2002]: During last year's outbreak, diagnosis of foot and mouth disease (FMD) was normally confirmed by the National Disease Control Centre on the basis of clinical observations of a veterinary inspector on the spot. Some cases were 213W confirmed on the basis of laboratory tests which confirmed the presence of FMD antibodies or virus. It is nearly five months since the last outbreak of foot and mouth and confirmation of any future case would need to be based on laboratory tests that confirm the presence of the virus.
§ Malcolm BruceTo ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what assessment she has made of the monitoring procedure to assess foot and mouth status in farm animals; and if she will make a statement. [38862]
§ Mr. Morley[holding answer 28 February 2002]: I am satisfied that we have effective arrangements for monitoring the presence of foot and mouth disease (FMD) in the national flock and herd. These are as follows:
(i) Any person who suspects that an animal in his possession or care may be affected by FMD is legally obliged to notify my Department.(ii) Ante and post mortem inspections are conducted on livestock at slaughterhouses by official veterinary surgeons working on behalf of the Meat Hygiene Service.(iii) Our extensive programme of serological testing of sheep flocks was an important part of the process of satisfying the Office International des Epizooties and the Standing Veterinary Committee of the EU the Great Britain is free of FMD. Nearly three million blood samples, from over 32,183 farms, have been tested. This includes samples taken from sentinel animals prior to the re-stocking of premises on which livestock have been slaughtered during the outbreak and from animals prior to movement under licence.(iv) Official veterinary surgeons and local authority inspectors are present at markets and carry out farm visits as part of their routine duties.(v) As part of the controlled restocking process, animals are examined regularly during a four week period of 'sentinel' restocking. In addition, sheep and goats on restocking premises are subject to blood testing after 28 days before restrictions are removed.Although it is now over five months since the last outbreak, the FMD investigation at a farm near Hawnby, North Yorkshire last week, underlines the importance of maintaining our guard, and shows that the system of monitoring for FMD during controlled restocking is vitally important. Farmers and vets should remain vigilant and all those who have contact with livestock must maintain the highest standards of bio-security.
§ Mr. Peter DuncanTo ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how much has been paid in compensation to councils in the UK in respect of damage to roads and infrastructure during the foot and mouth disease outbreak; and if she will estimate the sums still to be agreed and paid. [37383]
§ Mr. MorleyNo compensation has been paid in respect of damage to roads and infrastructure. The Department is considering claims or approaches from a small number of councils. I have no estimate of the total sum involved.
§ Ms WalleyTo ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the most recent assessment was of the contribution of wild brown rats to the spread of foot and mouth; and what the outcome was. [39489]
214W
§ Mr. MorleyRats are not susceptible to foot and mouth disease but are theoretically capable of spreading the disease mechanically. For this reason an intensive programme of rodent control is carried out on infected premises. We have no record of any case of FMD being attributable to rats.