Animal Aids Insurance Rappa Fencing Hydor Haygrove Crowshall Veterinary LA Systems McGregor Polytunnels Joice and Hill Poultry Huktamaki Lurgan

Last month Defra launched a consultation on its plan to seek payments from farmers towards budgeted and non-budgeted costs for animal disease. John Bowler, managing director of the free range egg company, John Bowler's Eggs, has labelled DEFRA's proposal "another tax on poultry producers."

BFREPA chairman Tom Vesey said he did not object in principle to cost sharing, provided that there was some control over the way it was handled. "We know how cavalier DEFRA is with money and it seems vital that we should have some control, since it is our money that will be spent," he said. "What we don't want is for DEFRA to be the sole arbiter. What a mess they made of the 2001 foot and mouth outbreak and the subsequent one caused by themselves at Purbright and, of course, the total shambles of the so called bovine TB control programme," said Tom. "It is vital that we press for a truly independent body to administer animal health – one on which farmers must sit and have a voice, together with retailers and food industry processors, for everyone is affected."

NFU president Peter Kendall wants Defra to gain a much tighter handle on its own costs before seeking to recoup money from farmers for diseases over which they have no control. He pointed to a recent National Audit Office report, which was very critical of Defra. It said that Defra's current procedures could not deliver a 'fair and equitable cost sharing scheme'.

The NFU said it remained intent on defending its members from additional cost burdens for animal disease - particularly as the foot and mouth outbreak in 2007 was traced to government-licensed premises and had already cost the industry £100m in uninsurable losses.

Peter Kendall said, "Farmers are dismayed by Defra's proposals and many have little confidence in Defra on animal health issues. We continue to see bovine TB reaching epidemic proportions in some parts of the country, wiping out nearly 40,000 cattle last year alone, and costing the industry millions. This is on top of the foot and mouth outbreak, which left the livestock industry reeling.

"Defra's effective and efficient management of the current animal health budget is seriously lacking and our view is backed by the National Audit Office. We must also remember that the costs we are being asked to cover relate to diseases that are not in this country. I do not believe that Defra treats the incursion of these diseases very seriously and certainly nowhere near as seriously as other governments in places like the US, Australia and New Zealand."

The Government proposes that a new independent body for animal health should be established. The NFU president said, "I believe that a new independent body for animal health could deliver a more proportionate and effective animal health policy. However, it must be a genuine partnership between livestock farmers and the Government and must have real powers and be able to deal with the European Commission on animal health issues. Under joint Government and industry governance I believe that an independent body should deliver better value for money for the taxpayer and for livestock farmers.

"Furthermore, it should enhance the position of the wider industry, food retailers and food manufacturers, who all benefit from keeping this country free from animal disease," he said.
"This round of consultations is really important. The potential implications of Defra's proposals for our members are huge."








John Bowler said that poultry producers were being asked to pay a livestock levy of £0.04 per bird place towards the cost of surveillance and preparation for outbreaks of exotic diseases, but any producer with less than 397 birds would be exempt under the current proposals.
"The proposed system does not differentiate between larger commercial producers, who already invest in sound health and bio-security measures as a matter of course, and those higher risk flocks, predominantly smaller, who don't," he said.

"The larger producers subject to the levy would therefore be paying twice, and it concerns me that the small-scale and backyard flocks would be exempt, given that they could be the ones to aggravate the situation if avian influenza, for example, was found.

"Every one of Bowler's producers, including my own farms, already carries out thorough vaccination programmes, farm health planning, and has top notch bio-security measures in place, which is indeed the case for the vast majority of larger-scale UK producers who, between them, supply most of the country's eggs."

He said, "DEFRA has suggested that future payments could be based on an assessment of each farm's specific risks, but why not do the risk assessments before introducing this scheme? And will they assess 'risk' according to history of disease in each industry or according to perceived risk?

"For instance, in the time I have been in the industry avian influenza has only occurred in this country in housed birds, yet the perceived risk is that wild migrating birds bring it onto the range and infect free range birds. Would we be penalised for this in the long term as they are re-assessing every year?"
He said the Government should consider alternatives to the proposals. "The hatcheries could collect the levy so no-one misses out on supporting the cause. They could be paid for doing so and save administrative costs in the process. Or perhaps agricultural grants and subsidies should be stopped or lowered to pay for this – why give it with one hand and take it back with the other?"

He said that, as they stood, the proposals would mean more administration and more regulatory bodies to deal with, and no visible gain to producers or consumers.

A Defra spokesman told the Ranger, "We are currently consulting on a wide range of issues around how fees might be levied, including the possibility of payment thresholds - and we agree that we need to strike the right balance between value for money and disease risk.

"The consultation seeks views on whether thresholds should apply, or whether a flat payment across sectors would be more appropriate. The payment thresholds in the consultation are a starting point for discussion and debate, and we encourage everyone with views on this subject to make their views known through the consultation process."

Back to news index

Red Hen Promotions Ltd - 01484 400666