Foot and Mouth/Bluetongue

17th October 2007

During a debate on the foot and mouth and bluetongue crises, Brooks Newmark calls on someone to take responsibility for the foot and mouth outbreak as it originated from a Government lab.

4.9 pm

Mr. Brooks Newmark (Braintree) (Con): I have often said that Mystic Meg would have done a better job of economic forecasting than the Prime Minister managed when he was in the Treasury, but his ascension as pharaoh this summer was met in short order by, if not quite the full spectrum of biblical plagues, at least a fair proportion of them. The rivers did not exactly turn to blood, but they certainly burst their banks, and our farmers have had to endure more than their fair share of pestilence and death. But sadly, across swathes of the country, there has been no exodus of animals going to market. The only frantic escape this summer has been the number of savers fleeing in the face of the Government's inept handling of the Northern Rock debacle.

The Prime Minister was keen to assure the country that he took personal control of the latest foot and mouth crisis. With typical hubris, he told the press in September that,

"it is only because we learnt lessons from what happened in 2001 on foot and mouth that we were able to act as instantly as we did to prevent the spread of that disease."

Only a week later, the Government had their own attack of foot in mouth, when they were forced to revoke the all-clear in the face of a new outbreak.

The 2001 general election was delayed because of the seriousness of the foot and mouth outbreak, but this year the Prime Minister was far more concerned with his own case of election fever than with the plight of thousands of farmers. Although he is quite safe from bluetongue, when it came to quashing election speculation, he proved that he was suffering from a good dose of forked tongue. Indeed, he decided against taking his case to the country only when he realised that he had become,

"a tainted wether of the flock, Meetest for death"

at the polls.

Mr. MacNeil: Given what the hon. Gentleman said about the Prime Minister's hubris, does he agree that the Prime Minister and his Government should not be allowed to get away without paying the compensation due to farmers and crofters in Scotland?

Mr. Newmark: The hon. Gentleman makes an excellent point-the same point made by all Opposition Members. I completely agree with what he says as it applies not only to Scotland, but to England and Wales.

My constituency lies within the present bluetongue control area. I can only say that over the summer local farmers were more interested in getting accurate information from DEFRA than they were in election speculation. As the livestock manager for a large farm in my constituency says,

"DEFRA guidance has not been particularly clear",

and the

"situation is changing so fast that nobody seems in control."

As a dairy farmer, he has not been too badly affected, because milk sales have continued and the price of milk has actually risen. However, although some livestock sales have now resumed, he has had to cull bull calves from his herd because they could not be sold and he has lost £40 or £50 per head as a result. His vets are being very strict, which he admits is quite right, but vets and farmers alike are finding it hard to get access to accurate and up-to-date information from DEFRA.

Farmers are not irresponsible people and they are not unreasonable. They appreciate that it is hard for the Government to keep up with a rapidly evolving situation such as the bluetongue outbreak.

Adam Afriyie (Windsor) (Con): I share my hon. Friend's view that farmers do the best that they can but that it is often DEFRA's operating procedures that cause the trouble. Is he aware, for example, that in the Windsor constituency in Berkshire, which was affected by the outbreak, cattle were seen falling off the back of a DEFRA lorry on a roundabout?

Mr. Newmark: My hon. Friend makes a good point, but I need to move on.

As I said, farmers are not irresponsible. They appreciate that it is hard for the Government to keep up with what is going on, but they should not have to fight to get accurate information and to get the necessary authorisations when they are only trying to obey the law. They should not be feeling that the Government have lost control.

Like much of East Anglia, Essex has been caught once again, now in a double whammy from foot and mouth and bluetongue. Forty years ago almost to the day, the first cases of foot and mouth were confirmed in Oswestry, marking the beginning of the 1967 outbreak. The culprit for the August outbreak was quickly established as the strain of virus from the 1967 outbreak, which was stored at Pirbright and released through broken drains. It seems that short-sightedness is not the only guilty bequest that the Government have inherited from the era of Harold Wilson.

Responding to the inquiry into the 2001 epidemic, the right hon. Member for Derby, South (Margaret Beckett) said:

"The House will want to know what else would be different in any future outbreak of foot and mouth disease."-[ Official Report, 6 November 2002; Vol. 392, c. 286.]

Well, although farmers have again been left to pick up the pieces, the difference is that the Government caused this outbreak directly. Why do I say that? As the Secretary of State himself announced last Monday, no money had been invested in the drains because they were not believed to be problematic. He was adamant about the sincerity of that belief, but how far was it reasonable and who is to be held accountable for it, given that it proved so disastrously incorrect? The Secretary of State told the House that

"nobody thought that they were in such a condition."-[ Official Report, 8 October 2007; Vol. 464, c. 39.]

But did anybody think to check-and if not, why not?

If, in similar circumstances, there had been an outbreak of a disease that was infectious to people, resignations would have followed and, presumably, charges would have been brought against those responsible.

Mr. Martlew: Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

Mr. Newmark: I have not got the time, so I am not giving way.

The latest foot and mouth outbreak has indirectly affected thousands through the loss of livestock and livelihoods. Someone still has to step up and take responsibility for that outbreak and its consequences for farmers.

4.15 pm