§ Baroness Byfordasked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs has shredded any of its records at national, regional or local level in respect of the foot and mouth outbreak in 2001. [HL240]
§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Lord Whitty)Defra is not aware of any of its official records having been shredded at national, regional or local level in respect of the foot and mouth outbreak in 2001. Defra has already made considerable efforts to bring together and consolidate centrally the foot and mouth record from all regional disease centres that were involved in the outbreak. Once this considerable task has been completed the record will be preserved in its entirety until it enters the formal Defra record review process in 2008. The National Archives have been kept up to date with progress on this issue and will decide in time whether to retain this record as part of its permanent collection.
§ Baroness Byfordasked Her Majesty's Government:
When a Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food Minister first knew of the video taken by the Northumberland trading standards officers on Bobby Waugh's farm on 24 February 2001. [HL241]
§ Lord WhittyI first became aware of the video when extracts from it were shown in the television news media at the time of Robert Waugh's trial in May 2002, and it was brought to Ministers' attention again as a result of the recent media and parliamentary interest generated by pig swill campaigners.
§ Baroness Byfordasked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they will clarify when a Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food Minister first saw 126WA the video taken by the Northumberland trading standards officers on Bobby Waugh's farm on 24 February 2001. [HL242]
§ Lord WhittyI first became aware of the video when extracts of it were shown in the television news media at the time of Robert Waugh's trial in May 2002. Its existence was brought to the attention of Ministers again as a result of the media and parliamentary interest in the video that was recently generated by swill feed campaigners. My honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (Commons) and I have watched the video. I refer the noble Baroness to the Written Ministerial Statement about the video made on 13 December 2004.
§ Baroness Byfordasked Her Majesty's Government:
Further to the Written Statement by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs on 13 December (HC Deb, 113WS ), why department officials were unaware that copies of the Northumberland County Council video of Burnside Farm in September 2003 had already been sent to the department in February 2003, when making their request for copies of the video. [HL464]
§ Lord WhittyThe official who was asked to obtain a copy of the video in September 2004 asked those colleagues whom he thought might know if a copy of the video was already in the possession of Defra. He was subsequently sent a copy by Defra's Newcastle animal health divisional office which had obtained a copy from Northumberland County Council afterFarmers Weekly had approached Defra about the video.
§ Baroness Byfordasked Her Majesty's Government:
Within their current contingency planning for the future eradication of foot and mouth disease, which of the following factors have the highest priority:
- (a) length of the outbreak;
- (b) number of animals killed; and
- (c) overall cost to Government. [HL509]
§ Lord WhittyThe Government do not base decisions on any one or combination of those considerations. The disease control strategy adopted will be consistent with the UK's EU obligations and in line with the appropriate EU legislation. The Government's objective in tackling any outbreak of FMD will be to control and eradicate the disease and to restore the UK's disease-free status as quickly as possible. In doing so, the Government will seek to select control strategies which balance minimising the number of animals which need to be slaughtered, either to control the disease or on welfare grounds, and which keeps animal welfare problems to a minimum; causing the least possible disruption to the food, farming and tourism industries, to visitors to the countryside, and to rural communities and the wider economy; minimising damage to the environment and protecting public health; and minimising the burden on taxpayers and the public at large.
127WA
§ The Countess of Marasked Her Majesty's Government:
What account was taken of species variation in relation to susceptibility to infection and onward transmission of foot and mouth virus in estimating possible dates of viral introduction to premises at Burnside Farm, Heddon-on-the-Wall and Prestwick Hall Farm, Ponteland; and [HL605]
What is the evidence to support the assertions that contaminated meat was not imported into the United Kingdom and that it was "highly improbable that the disease could have been imported legally from South Africa" (Anderson I (2002),Foot and Mouth Disease 2001: Lessons to be Learned Inquiry ). [HL602]
§ Lord WhittyI refer the noble Countess to theOrigin of the UK Foot and Mouth Disease Epidemic in 2001 that was published in June 2002 and placed in the Library.
§ The Countess of Marasked Her Majesty's Government:
What evidence was adduced to support the contention that "Catering waste, containing illegally imported meat infected with virus is believed to have been fed to pigs as swill." (Anderson I (2002),Foot and Mouth Disease 2001: Lessons to be Learned Inquiry ). [HL604]
§ Lord WhittyI refer the noble Countess to theOrigin of the UK Foot and Mouth Disease Epidemic in 2001 that was published in June 2002 and placed in the Library.
§ The Countess of Marasked Her Majesty's Government:
How they account for the fact that none of the pigs, cattle or sheep found at Heddon View, Heddon-on-the-Wall, adjacent to Burnside Farm, where swill for Burnside Farm was processed, was shown to have clinical signs of foot and mouth disease prior to slaughter as direct contacts on 24 February 2001. [HL606]
§ Lord WhittyDangerous contact animals are slaughtered if they appear to have been in any way exposed to the infection of foot and mouth disease, the objective being to slaughter them before they develop disease and propagate infection. It is therefore not surprising that clinical signs of disease were not found in the animals at Heddon View.
§ The Countess of Marasked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether cattle and sheep at Prestwick Hall Farm were found to be clinically affected by foot and mouth disease on 22 February 2001; whether some sheep were seropositive for foot and mouth disease; and whether earlier in February 128WA
which are complaints which can be confused with signs of foot and mouth disease. [HL632]
- (a) sheep had been treated for lameness; and
- (b) some cattle had been treated for metabolic acidosis,
§ Lord WhittyI refer the noble Countess to theOrigin of the UK Foot and Mouth Disease Epidemic in 2001 that was published in June 2002 and placed in the Library.
The farmer's private veterinary surgeon diagnosed and treated Limousine heifers on Prestwick Hall Farm for barley acidosis on 19 February 2001.
§ Baroness Howe of Idlicoteasked Her Majesty'sGovernment:
What investigations were carried out to examine possible alternative origins and spread of foot and mouth disease during and after the 2001 outbreak. [HL609]
§ Lord WhittyI refer the noble Baroness to theOrigin of the UK Foot and Mouth Disease Epidemic in 2001 that was published in June 2002 and placed in the Library.