The Northern Ireland Assembly - Interim Report on the Inquiry into the 2001 Foot and Mouth Disease Outbreak in Northern Ireland

Mr Patterson: I am Martin Patterson from the economic development section of Newry and Mourne District Council; my colleagues are from the rural area of Newry and Mourne. I apologise for Cllr Pascal McDonald and Séamus Crossey from the council offices, who could not attend.

197.

The foot-and-mouth outbreak curtailed the tourism, agriculture and business sectors. Members will be aware that the Newry and Mourne area is very active in tourism; it has two areas of outstanding natural beauty that were greatly affected by the outbreak. Newry and Mourne straddles south Armagh and south Down, and the business sector of that area was greatly affected. Many recently opened business parks suffered, and major events had to be cancelled. Some of our representatives are directly invovled in agriculture and have their own views on the foot-and-mouth outbreak.

198.

The Chairperson: What is required to curb the illegal importation of livestock and beef products? Australia and New Zealand have a very good system that has proved successful. Do we need a similar system?

199.

Mr Patterson: We should have an all-Ireland animal and plant health policy. Cattle and fish do not see boundaries. They cross borders through rivers and fields, so an all-Ireland animal and plant health policy would be beneficial.

200.

Mr Burns: There are farms in our district that straddle the border.

201.

Mr Hearty: We had serious problems with that. Small farmers who had land on both sides of the border could not move or use machinery on one part of their land. Those who had only one tractor were particularly crippled. They were not allowed to take any machinery across the border — even their cars were thoroughly washed. It was a huge inconvenience to farmers.

202.

Ms O’Hare: The policy of keeping animals out of the island must be tightened on an all-island basis. We could use the Australian system, but we could also develop a better one. As the area first hit by the disease, we want to see a comprehensive plan put in place that can be brought into operation right away, because everyone was caught flat-footed when the disease broke out.

203.

Mr McHugh: The Veterinary Service, farmers and the Department must work more closely together on biosecurity. Several issues must be addressed, particularly the distrust that has grown along border areas.

204.

Mr Hearty: Because of Newry and Mourne’s situation, it is vital that the Departments of Agriculture, on both sides of the border, work together more than they have. It is vital for the survival of the agriculture industry.

205.

Mr McHugh: Was there a failure to move quickly on the foot-and-mouth outbreak?

206.

Mr Hearty: Definitely. There must be a more hands-on approach by the Departments on both sides of the border.

207.

Mr Patterson: Meigh, which is in Newry and Mourne District Council, was the site of the original outbreak in Northern Ireland. Although Department officials were fantastic, and the council was briefed at the time, there was no contingency plan. It hit us suddenly, and although measures were carried out rapidly, we must consider developing a contingency plan.

208.

Mr McHugh: Has it improved since?

209.

Mr Patterson: Absolutely.

210.

Ms O’Hare: PricewaterhouseCoopers said that it was good in theory; however, we wonder how well it will work in practice. We have been told that there will be co-operation and that it will be dealt with, in theory. However, there is nothing in place to develop it.

211.

The Chairperson: That is how the Committee feels. We want something tangible; we want to know how quickly that will swing into action. I do not believe that there are contingency plans; there is talk, but there are no structures, and that is important.

212.

Ms O’Hare: They probably exist on paper, but we need more than that.

213.

Mr Doherty: To what extent did the council’s lack of awareness of a contingency plan affect its reaction to the evolving situation and the daily changes?

214.

Ms O’Hare: The council’s first reaction was to close as much as it could. The public health sector came into its own with the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development and worked very hard; it worked flat out during that time. The Chief Executive got everything up and running as quickly as possible. It is important to know who to speak to; contact names are necessary so that if it happened again a council could have a contingency plan.

215.

Newry and Mourne District Council could not have reacted any faster. It was the first council to be affected by foot-and-mouth disease and it reacted by closing everything as quickly as possible, reviewing everything as it went along. The council handled the situation well, but there is always a better way. With hindsight, there was probably a quicker way of handling it, mainly involving co-operation between all the organisations.

216.

Mr Doherty: If, God forbid, it happened again tomorrow, would the council react differently?

217.

Mr Hearty: The council would react better. The council was very quick to act and gave all the help that it could to the Department, and it looked to the Department for advice. However, the Department itself was caught out; it had no contingency plan. On several occasions, the Department had to consult another body before getting back to the council; that cost vital time at the beginning of the outbreak.

218.

Mr Doherty: There could not be awareness of a plan if there was no plan to begin with.

219.

Mr Hearty: No.

220.

Mr Bradley: I must go easy on my colleagues from Newry and Mourne District Council in case they exact their revenge in the council chamber. I pay tribute to the council’s officers and its agriculture committee for their well-prepared response document.

221.

How did the outbreak affect tourism in Newry and Mourne?

222.

Mr Patterson: Enquiries to the council’s tourism offices halved during 2001 compared with 2000 and 2002. All major events were cancelled. The council’s area covers two areas of outstanding natural beauty and it thrives on tourism. All sporting events were cancelled; all pitches, soccer and Gaelic, were closed, as were hockey pitches. Newry Agricultural Show, which is a major event in Newry and Mourne, was cancelled.

223.

The number of bed spaces decreased. The St Patrick’s Day parade is a major event for Newry City, but it was cancelled. A new business park at Flurry Bridge had just opened and had difficulty gaining occupancy because it was right on the border with Jonesborough.

224.

Mr Burns: Slieve Gullion Courtyard was closed for four months as a result of the outbreak. The council depends on rural tourism, fishing and hill walking, all of which shut down completely. It was a great pity that smaller tourist businesses did not receive any compensation for the outbreak.

225.

Ms O’Hare: Newry and Mourne District Council is not one of the Northern Ireland Tourist Board’s regional tourism organisations, which was the only mechanism that was used to obtain compensation for tourism providers.

226.

Because Newry and Mourne District Council is not part of that, it was excluded from compensation packages. Newry and Mourne decided not to become one of the Tourist Board’s regional tourism organisations, and therefore tourist businesses in its area were excluded from compensation. That was discrimination. Many providers received no compensation, whereas providers and groups in areas that were affiliated to the Tourist Board did. That affected some rural operators very badly, especially those who were trying to promote farms; a few open farms had started up in our area, but they had to close. They received no compensation.

227.

The Chairperson: Excuse my ignorance, but why are you not in the group that was entitled to compensation?

228.

Ms O’Hare: The council decided that being a regional tourism organisation was not the best way of marketing the area’s diversity. The nearest group was Kingdoms of Down, but because half the district is in Armagh, the council felt that it would not be marketing the area properly. For a while, it tried to market the area as having two different identities; however, it decided that that was too expensive and that this was the best way.

229.

The Chairperson: It seems very unfair that because the council decided on a different way of doing business it did not receive compensation when the disease spread.

230.

Mr Doherty: At the Committee for Enterprise, Trade and Investment’s tourism inquiry on 26 September 2002, regional tourism organisations — how they operate and who was involved or excluded — was discussed as a matter of real concern.

231.

Mr Patterson: Newry and Mourne District Council is not the only council that is not in a regional tourism organisation: our neighbours, Banbridge District Council and Armagh District Council also chose not to go down that route.

232.

The Chairperson: That is an interesting matter that must be highlighted.

233.

Mr Kane: The European Union is to review foot-and-mouth disease legislation with a view to updating it. Given the lessons that were learnt from the 2001 outbreak, the wide range of legislation, the cumbersome disposal of carcasses, animal health, welfare and compensation, what changes to the legislation do you recommend that the Department press for in Europe?

234.

Mr Hearty: There must be an entirely new plan. For example, during the outbreak in Meigh dead animals lay in a field and carcasses were burnt less than a mile from a primary school. The review should come up with an effective plan.

235.

During the first outbreak of the disease in the South of Ireland, all culled animals were burnt on farms. Afterwards, however, culled animals were taken to abattoirs to be disposed of there. We must develop a similar strategy rather than depend on what we have now.

236.

Mr Burns: Had it not been for strong local opposition, animals would have been buried in Slieve Gullion Courtyard.

237.

Mr Patterson: The report makes the point that the centralised recorded livestock identification system could be vastly improved. Much legislation comes from Europe, and therefore councils should consult regularly; Newry and Mourne District Council has an integrated rural and agricultural committee that meets every two months. Any consultation will come directly to the council for comment.

238.

Mr Hearty: The council would then reply.

239.

Mr Ford: We have focused on what the Department has not done and on what it should do. What could district councils have done that they were not asked to do during the outbreak?

240.

I have noted your concerns about refuse collection, for example, on which the environmental health service had a different view from the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development. Should district councils have a role in improving communications and in developing an emergency plan?

241.

Ms O’Hare: The council must develop a plan — perhaps a central refuse collection if outside vehicles are being kept out of an area. Leaving refuse for a long time creates health problems. That was simply not foreseen at the time, and we did not know how to solve the problem. Such a plan would have to be put into action if there were a place to which people will be obliged to take their rubbish. Other proposals must be considered too.

242.

Mr Patterson: Every council now has an emergency action plan, and it is our own fault if we fail to review it regularly. As a middle manager, I took part in a review some 12 months ago, yet I have not returned to it since. Councils should examine that in more depth and perhaps meet more regularly.

243.

Mr Ford: What consultation was there between the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development and your environmental health department over carcass disposal?

244.

Mr Patterson: It took place directly through our Clerk and Chief Executive; it started as soon as the outbreak began in May 2001 and continued throughout.

245.

The Chairperson: Signals from Europe and Westminster seem to suggest that if there were another outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease, it would be dealt with by vaccination rather than by slaughter and burning. What is your attitude to that?

246.

Ms O’Hare: It depends on whether vaccinated meat would be acceptable to the consumer; after all, part of the germ is being introduced into the animal. Much depends on how the European Union would deal with the matter.

247.

The Chairperson: There was a serious reaction to the burnings; people will ask: why burn all those animals when they could have been vaccinated and spared? There are difficulties.

248.

Ms O’Hare: Vaccinating animals means that they cannot enter the food chain, which sort of defeats the purpose of producing them in the first place. It all depends on whether, after vaccination, the animals can go back into the food chain.

249.

The Chairperson: They would have to go back into the food chain.

250.

Ms O’Hare: Not if the European Union prevented them.

251.

The Chairperson: But will people buy them?

252.

Mr Hearty: May I briefly raise the issue of brucellosis. I know that it affected other areas, but farmers in Newry and Mourne were particularly badly hit. Farms tested in our area were saturated with brucellosis, which was a serious loss to the farming community. Prices were low at the time, and cattle were valued at only 75% of their normal price. Something must be done urgently, for there was 100% compensation for TB reactors.

253.

Our area, which was saturated with brucellosis, took a severe blow. Cattle above 30 months were not allowed to move. Some farmers in the Newry and Mourne area will never recover, given present livestock prices. People in the beef sector who bought in cattle and slaughtered them at the same price got nothing for their work but the premium. The industry suffered a severe blow, and the Committee must give a major push to come up with a plan to help.

254.

The Chairperson: The Committee is also inquiring into brucellosis. Thank you for your helpful evidence. The Committee Clerk will give you a copy of the questions that we did not have time to ask; please send your replies as soon as possible.

255.

Mr Patterson: Before I leave, I apologise on behalf of Cllr William Burns who was unable to attend the meeting.

256.

The Chairperson: When I see him, I will talk to him. Thank you.

MINUTES OF EVIDENCE

Friday 27 September 2002

Members present:

Rev Dr Ian Paisley (Chairperson)

Mr Bradley

Mr P Doherty

Mr Ford

Mr Kane

Mr McHugh

Witnesses:

Mr J O’Kane )

Mr S Hugget )

Mr H Andrews ) Fermanagh District Council

Mr R Forde )

257.

The Chairperson: I welcome Mr John O’Kane, Mr Stephen Hugget, Mr Harold Andrews and Mr Robert Forde from Fermanagh District Council.

258.

We have a quorum today, but I cannot chain people.

259.

Mr Forde: We are pleased to give the Committee our views on how the foot-and-mouth disease outbreak of 2001 was handled, and, more importantly, our opinions on how any future outbreak could be better dealt with or prevented.

260.

We make our comments against a background in which we acknowledge that the Assembly and the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development gave the best leadership of any region in the United Kingdom during the 2001 outbreak. We further congratulate the Assembly for carrying out a review specifically for Northern Ireland. Although Northern Ireland had a limited number of outbreaks — three in total — we must take the view that one outbreak is one too many. Hence, we must take on board measures that ensure that Northern Ireland has no more outbreaks in the future.

261.

I shall summarise the points that we wish to make. The councillors with me today are representative of the three wards of Erne North, Erne East and Erne West in Fermanagh District Council; they will provide further details.

262.

First, there is an urgent need for a unified national emergency plan that recognises the role and expertise of district councils. I am sure that there was a plan, but it would appear that it was largely unknown outside the Department’s veterinary service. The plan, including the contingency arrangements, would need to be regularly tested. It would determine where animals are slaughtered and whether they were to be buried or burned. Communication is a key concept; there is a role there for the Food Standards Agency. The information provided must be timely, for farmers and the general public alike.

263.

The district councils’ role in giving advice on matters such as pollution control, statutory nuisance, private water supplies and contamination of land was not recognised in a UK context. The delays in the slaughter of sheep came in for a great deal of negative comment. If a proper plan had been in existence, the risks associated with the delay could have been avoided.

264.

Our second concern involved the movement of animals and the control at ports and airports. The movement of animals from a foot-and-mouth disease identified area, namely the UK mainland, to Northern Ireland, was totally unacceptable. Any incidence of disease on the mainland should have resulted in the automatic closure of the ports to such imports, and an action plan to prevent the transmission of the disease should have been triggered at all ports and airports. The experience of the foot-and-mouth disease outbreak of 2001 would prove that that is applicable to animals destined for slaughter as well as other animals.

265.

The introduction of the single European market in the early 1990s has resulted in the scaling down of import controls and has increased the risk of spreading disease that can have an impact on animal health. The controls at ports and airports of the importation of live animals and meat and meat products should be examined. The incidence of illegal imports of products for consumption by ethnic minorities in mainland UK is well documented. Northern Ireland ports and airports must guard against becoming a back door entry for such goods, if the UK authorities step up their policing at ports and airports.

266.

The effective practice of import controls in Australia and New Zealand, and examples of best practice everywhere, should be examined and adopted here.

267.

During the outbreak, there was good co-operation between the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development in Northern Ireland and the Department of Agriculture and Food in the Republic. However, people in border areas often commented that it would have been easy to provide disinfection mats at the entry into Northern Ireland as well as the entry into the Republic.

268.

The adoption of agreed animal disease prevention controls for Northern Ireland and the Republic should be a future priority. Prior to the foot-and-mouth outbreak, some animals were illegally transported across the Republic of Ireland border. The Minister may need to be given emergency powers to authorise the destruction of stray livestock. There were some stray sheep on a mountain in Fermanagh, and it took a long time to capture them, but I know that one of the Committee members is well aware of such things.

269.

Thirdly, food-and-mouth disease has had an effect on the agri-food and tourism sectors. The agri-food sector had to cope with many additional restrictions and regulations, and requirements were continually changing with regard to documentation. Notification of the requirements to industry, councils and environmental health departments was poor. The confusion caused major problems for many food exporters. However, better communication with district councils, environmental health departments and the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development improved the situation. In one case, different forms were required for meat and milk products, and one factory produced both products, which caused confusion. It also caused confusion for Fermanagh District Council. The agri-food and tourism business has suffered considerably.

270.

The EU was discussing vaccination recently. The pros and cons should be fully considered now, rather than having the debate when the disease is at its height. Scientific fact and public opinion must resolve the issue, but many people remain to be convinced. An article in ‘The Times’ on 9 September stated that Nestlé had serious reservations about accepting milk from vaccinated cows.

271.

Mr Kane: The EU community will review foot-and-mouth disease legislation with a view to updating it. Given the lessons learned from the 2001 outbreak, and also given the wide range of legislation encompassing the disposal of carcasses, animal health, welfare and compensation, what changes do you recommend in the legislation at European level?

272.

Mr O’Kane: The Department of Agriculture and Rural Development commissioned an independent review, which I am unclear about. There are extensive procedures, and some of them will require legislation. For example, is it against EU legislation for the UK to have port and airport control between mainland GB and Northern Ireland? Perhaps that was done on an ad hoc basis, but was there any legal authority to do that?

273.

Mr Kane: You mentioned ports and airports. Do you want that whole process tightened up?

274.

Mr O’Kane: It would have to be tightened up on an all-island basis, but the problem arises between mainland GB and Northern Ireland. The EU would need to agree the legality of controls and incorporate that into legislation, and that would give the Minister sound legislative backing.

275.

In England, it was questionable whether the Government had any legal authority to impose many of the regulations and controls it did.

276.

The public in Northern Ireland, especially in County Fermanagh, co-operated with the regulations and measures, because they saw that they were necessary and reasonable. We had a down-to-earth approach. However, regulations were imposed willy-nilly in parts of England, which caused confusion and confrontations between the farming community and the Government vets.

277.

Many of the recommendations that resulted from the inquiry are worthwhile. The farming community might take exception to some of them, such as the tagging of sheep. The questions are: when will we adopt the recommendations, who will fund them and what role will district councils play? Issues on the movement of animals must be clarified, for example, because EU legislation impinges on airport and port controls on movement between mainland UK and Northern Ireland.

278.

The Chairperson: The Committee must move on.

279.

Mr Kane: Apart from more stringent controls on transport across the border, is there anything that you want to mention?

280.

Mr O’Kane: No.

281.

Mr Bradley: Will you outline the impact of the disease on other sectors in your council area? For example, you mentioned the impact on tourism. Will you give the Committee more details, such as the impact on farmhouse bed-and-breakfast establishments and equestrian centres and the losses that they sustained?

282.

Mr Hugget: It is difficult to measure the level of loss. All we can say is that we had many problems, because Fermanagh is virtually enclosed by the border, and many farmers operate on both sides of it. Many cross-border rural regeneration activities were practically closed down for a year, because people did not meet. That aspect is probably not talked about much. We were disappointed that local people did not speak to, or meet, each other, yet there seemed to be no control over the movement of people who were coming into Fermanagh from potentially infected areas of Northern Ireland.

283.

It is difficult to measure the loss that Fermanagh’s tourism suffered, given all the other problems affecting the Province. I do not know how it would be calculated.

284.

Mr Bradley: We talked about contingency plans in case of a future outbreak. Proper contingency plans might help to prevent a similar situation occurring.

285.

Mr Andrews: As a dairy farmer, I know that every farmer adopted a fortress mentality. Movement, especially between farms, was restricted to prevent spreading the disease. Tourism did suffer due to the closure of sites such as parks. The outbreak had a detrimental effect, especially on Fermanagh, which is dependent on tourism income.

286.

Mr D Ford: Your written submission detailed an emergency plan and the role of all stakeholders. Mr Forde outlined some areas of council experience, in particular that of environmental health. Are there other areas, not already highlighted, where the council could contribute to an emergency plan or get involved in dealing with an emergency, should it arise?

287.

Mr R Forde: The more district councils get involved, the better. Elected Members can talk to people; the Chief Executive can publicise the issue, and the local press can run local stories. There are 23 councillors throughout the area who will disseminate the message too.

288.

Mr P Doherty: Were you aware of the existence of a contingency plan, and what were your views on it? Looking to the future, do you feel that a stronger contingency plan should put in place, and should it have a cross-border dimension?

289.

Mr Andrews: A contingency plan is essential. There was a foot-and-mouth disease outbreak in GB in the 1960s, and the lesson from that outbreak was not learned. Many provisions that should have been put in place were not, and an ad hoc situation existed — the problem was dealt with on a day-to-day basis. Plans to deal with aspects of the outbreak, like the burning of affected animals, were not in place. The burning and burying of those animals was of concern to the general public. A contingency plan should be in place to address those issues, rather than wait until the arrival of a crisis.

290.

Mr P Doherty: Is there a contingency plan in place now?

291.

Mr Andrews: I do not think so.

292.

Mr R Forde: I have no doubt that the Department of Rural Development and the Veterinary Service have a contingency plan, however it does not affect too many Departments and is not widely known.

293.

The Chairperson: Is there any real proof of that? The Committee has probed the departmental officials, and they have hedged on that question; they will not come clean on it. Surely if a contingency plan exists, the Department should advise that they have a plan. The Department should then be asked what the structures of that plan are. That is where the obstacles arise.

294.

Mr R Forde: I am making an assumption that there is a plan. I cannot believe that a plan has not been put into operation by the Veterinary Service.

295.

The Chairperson: You have more faith than I have.

296.

Mr Hugget: My contacts with the Department of Rural Development about the issue of farmers moving across the border to tend to their land and cattle proved to me that there was no contingency plan. The Gardaí allowed farmers to cross at some places and not at others; at times they allowed machinery to cross and at other times they did not. On some occasions, machinery had to be cleaned before it could cross, and at other times just a local wash was given. They were flying by the seat of their pants.

297.

The Chairperson: Should a proper contingency plan be put in place now, as we may have to face the same situation again?

298.

Mr O’Kane: The independent review recommends that a contingency plan be put in place, along with an operational framework, which will put the nuts and bolts on the plan. That would be welcome. In Fermanagh, we were fortunate that we did not experience an outbreak of the disease. Had it occurred there, the disposal of slaughtered animals would have posed a horrendous problem, given the water table and the associated difficulties.

299.

I have read some of the review’s recommendations regarding the contingency plan, and they seem eminently worthwhile. The review stated that there is no good in having a plan if no one knows about it. The recommendation of a stakeholders’ forum is very worthwhile, not just for farmers’ unions. Farmers are not very union-minded now, although they have had to be to some extent to get forms filled in, for example. A stakeholders’ forum involving all groups — unions, farmers and councils — would be beneficial. If the North/South Ministerial Council were incorporated, an all-Ireland stakeholders’ forum could also feed into that.

300.

Many of the recommendations are worthwhile, but it would be costly to implement a plan if one were adopted. Who will resource those plans? If district councils take part in such a plan, what resourcing will they expect, or will they have to fund it from their own resources? Certainly I am in favour of a contingency plan — but with stakeholder awareness of how everything is to fall into place.

301.

The Chairperson: I agree.

302.

Mr McHugh: Welcome.

303.

I take the point about pollution. Washing occurred along the borders for months on end. Where did the water and chemicals go? The amount of water and chemicals would have been tenfold had it been done on the scale necessary for an outbreak. Was there enough collaboration between vets and farmers to have the proper surveillance or to enhance surveillance so that various other exotic diseases could be monitored? Was it good enough? Has it changed or improved? Is there enough collaboration now? Is there a possibility of biosecurity overkill? There are now many regulations because of the remote possibility that an outbreak might happen every so many years.

304.

Mr Hugget: There are two aspects to consider in contingency plans: risk assessment and management, and training. The resources required to implement a meaningful contingency plan must be balanced against the likelihood of an outbreak happening and any effects. It comes down to the question of the failure of the Animal and Public Health Information System (APHIS) and problems with tagging across the board, let alone in each jurisdiction. Those issues need serious consideration.

305.

Mr O’Kane: Again, it is about reasonableness. People usually co-operate with speed limits when they see and understand the need for them. There was some overkill at the time of the outbreak. Even in churches and various places, mats were appearing and then removed on health and safety grounds. There was quite a catalogue of things like that happening.

306.

Farm biosecurity is one thing; animal disease and welfare on farms is another. Farmers must currently comply with so many regulations that they are liable to be resistant to some of them. The Farm Quality Assurance Scheme (FQAS) and new requirements that are being imposed on farms currently are two examples. There is some concern about those, and there may be an element of overkill.

307.

Mr McHugh: Some people say that the APHIS is very good at tracking tags rather than animals at present.

308.

The Chairperson: We will have to leave it there. Thank you very much for coming and for your contribution.

MINUTES OF EVIDENCE

Friday 27 September 2002

Members present:

Rev Dr Ian Paisley (Chairperson)

Mr Bradley

Mr Doherty

Mr Ford

Mr Kane

Mr McHugh

Witnesses:

Mr J Meehan ) Derry City Council

309.

The Chairperson: The Committee welcomes Mr John Meehan of Derry City Council. If we do not have time to ask you all the questions that we wish, we will ask you to respond in writing.

310.

Mr Meehan: I am the chief environmental health officer of Derry City Council. The council is pleased to have been invited to the Committee to comment on the follow-up review of the foot-and-mouth disease crisis, and although our comments are probably uncontroversial we welcome the opportunity to have our opinions heard at this decision-making forum.

311.

The council spelt out several issues in its letter to the Committee; some reflect the council’s experience during the crisis, whereas others are more from an environmental health perspective. The council managed during the period by establishing a foot-and-mouth disease emergency team, which had daily meetings and was in regular daily contact with the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development. The team involved all the main players in the council, and they examined the potential effect on local sporting and major crowd events and activities such as greyhound racing. There was close co-operation between the agencies, which ensured that the Department’s rulings were quickly enforced.

312.

There may have been occasional uncertainty about the messages coming from the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure and from the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development. It would be helpful to have just one information point giving guidance to statutory agencies in future. Some bodies were getting information from the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure when they should have been getting it from the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development.

313.

We shared the use and maintenance of disinfectant mats at the most frequently used centres throughout the council area, and arrangements were in place to ensure that council transportation arrangements were covered by the proper disinfection procedures.

314.

We would like the Committee to consider what policy changes might be needed to ensure a more sustainable agricultural practice in Northern Ireland. The movement of livestock between the market, the slaughterhouse and the place of consumption must be reconsidered. The more that livestock are moved, the greater the chance of infection. If we developed a more sustainable approach to agriculture, focusing in particular on livestock slaughtered and consumed locally, we could encourage consumers to buy locally. The huge mileage incurred when transporting livestock in the island of Ireland and in Great Britain increases the risk of spreading infection and is not the most sustainable way of running agriculture. I come from an environmental health background and am not aware of all the issues; however, some consideration should be given to those points purely from the point of view of sustainability.

315.

We are concerned about illegal imports and the fragmented arrangements involving the Department and other agencies such as the Food Standards Agency and district councils. The Department should have a more consistent approach and consider controls at ports and airports. With the market burgeoning, there will be an increased opportunity for illegal imports. There are concerns in Great Britain and in the Republic about the more exotic imports; the growing ethic communities, which demand a certain type of animal that would not be produced in Northern Ireland, may be fuelling that. Such imports could involve risks to animal and human health. The Department should consider arrangements for tightening imports.

316.

Liaison between the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development and our council was very good, and, after some teething problems, the system worked well. There were concerns in Great Britain about pyres where it was felt that there was insufficient communication and co-operation. That did not happen here and things worked well. Environmental health would be concerned at the risk from dioxins from pyres and the danger to the waterways.

317.

The arrangements were good between Departments North and South, and arrangements at the border worked well. Perhaps the formula that worked here during the foot-and-mouth-disease crisis could provide a template for managing future bio-emergencies.

318.

The Agriculture Committee or a committee for emergency management could consider the biological hazards. In general, the arrangements work very well.

319.

The Chairperson: Thank you; that has been very helpful. What is required to curb the illegal importation of livestock and meat products? The system in Australia and New Zealand is elaborate but effective. Are you in favour of introducing such a system here?

320.

Mr Meehan: Yes. In the past, the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (MAFF) carried out some activities and the Department of Health others; control has always been a problem. The Food Standards Agency’s remit was a politically driven initiative after the major food scares in Great Britain. It is important that the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development and the Food Standards Agency hammer the matter out. We would welcome that.

321.

Mr McHugh: Derry city has a totally different perspective on foot-and-mouth disease than does the rural area, which extends almost as far as Cookstown. Have changes been made to biosecurity or to contingency measures? If so, is the council happy with the changes controlling and preventing foot-and-mouth disease and exotic diseases?

322.

Mr Meehan: The main change has been improved awareness. The farming community should use its high profile in the local media to send out clear messages on animal health and the economic side of the business. The foot-and-mouth crisis taught us the need for better communication. The agencies in Northern Ireland worked well together; liaison has been established between the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development, the staff who deal with water pollution in the Environment and Heritage Service and Derry City Council. Each knows the others’ roles and responsibilities, and it works well. My only concern is the necessity to move away from animal health to animal/human health. The Food Standards Agency and the Veterinary Service must clarify matters.

323.

Mr McHugh: A cow is moved approximately 14 times in its life. During the foot-and-mouth crisis the markets were closed and farmers were in an uncompetitive situation with meat processors. Even with change, that would continue. Meat processors were already closed in Fermanagh, and the distance now travelled by animals is too great. How would resolving that help your area?

324.

Mr Meehan: I look at it from three perspectives. The first concerns Local Agenda 21 and sustainable economies; that involves reducing as far as possible classification usage. Furthermore, councils listen clearly to the farming community.

325.

That farmers are being squeezed by the major supermarket chains is topical. However, there could be better links between farmers and consumers to control livestock movement, which would stop supermarket chains distorting the market and would benefit animal health and consumers. I do not know how that could be done, as I do not have a background in it.

326.

Mr Doherty: Forward planning is essential. Was the council aware of a plan and, more importantly, is there a contingency plan in place to deal with the problem if it were to reoccur? Given that Derry City Council serves a border area, does it discuss such issues with Donegal County Council?

327.

Mr Meehan: I did not know whether a plan was in place. After the emergency arose, the council worked quickly and drafted a simple plan for use in its area, although I do not know how it fits in with the provincial plan. Derry City Council’s plan is based on its experience at that time, and there would be merit in the Committee’s bringing provincial plans together to create a template. The council has regular contact with the North-Western Health Board on food safety.

328.

Mr Doherty: Is the plan at health board rather than county council level?

329.

Mr Meehan: Yes; it is at health board level. I do not know whether that will affect the review of public administration, but control in the Republic of Ireland is with the health boards rather than local government.

330.

Mr Ford: Mr Logue’s letter states that local authorities relied heavily on advice from the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development, which, as you said Mr Meehan, was initially uncertain. What environmental health advice could you have given the Department in the early stages? As an environmental health officer, do you think that there are other aspects in which the council could have been more involved?

331.

Mr Meehan: There was major criticism in Great Britain about the lack of influence from the Chartered Institute of Environmental Health. Fortunately, there are many environmental health officials in senior positions in the more influential organisations here. That should be formally recognised and arrangements should be put in place to accommodate comment by the Chartered Institute of Environmental Health. The Committee will receive a submission from its local director.

332.

Mr Bradley: Mr Meehan said that Derry City Council met every day during the crisis; I serve on Newry and Mourne District Council, which did not. I congratulate Derry City Council. A contingency plan would facilitate the daily exchange of information. I appreciate that your background is in environmental health, but what effect did the foot-and-mouth crisis have on agri-business and rural tourism facilities such as equestrian centres in the Derry City Council area?

333.

Mr Meehan: In the past few years, the main focus of tourism in the Derry City Council area has been on people visiting the city and then travelling to Donegal, Antrim or Fermanagh. Tourism was seriously affected during the foot-and-mouth outbreak. I could not quantify it because several factors have affected tourism in the past 18 months, and, as yet, it has not been determined which of them had the greatest effect.

334.

The Chairperson: During the crisis, did the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development suggest how it would deal with the burning of carcasses in a widespread outbreak?

335.

Mr Meehan: No; that was never raised. In future, contingency plans will be relevant. I mentioned what we did locally, and I have a brief summary of what we would do should there be a reoccurrence. The Committee could play a part in developing the effectiveness of contingency plans.

336.

The Chairperson: If there were another outbreak, the Government may go for vaccination to prevent its spread rather than burn the carcasses of slaughtered animals. What would be the result of that? Having witnessed the massive slaughter and burning that the Government undertook, would people accept the need for vaccination? Would they be prepared to eat the meat of animals that had been vaccinated?

337.

Mr Meehan: That is a matter of public confidence.

338.

The Chairperson: You are supposed to be a jack and master of all trades. That is what councillors expect of you.

339.

Mr Meehan: A major spin would be required to shift sentiment in order to persuade people that vaccination was the only way to avoid the distresssing scenes of the mass burning of livestock. The public would probably remain sceptical, so a major education exercise would be needed. There is confusion in the public mind about the effect of vaccination on an animal’s health, the recovery period, the effect on the meat and the residual effect of a vaccine. A clear message would help. Once again, the Food Standards Agency has a major role to play in getting the public’s mind clear about the effect. That is where we will make progress.

340.

The Chairperson: We cannot be sure that all meat imported into Great Britain and Northern Ireland is unvaccinated.

341.

Mr Meehan: I cannot comment on that; I have never seen an official departmental position on it.

342.

The Chairperson: Do Departments not want to deal with it? My experience in Europe and in Westminster leads me to believe that the Government will, without doubt, opt for vaccination.

343.

Mr Kane: The European Union is to review foot-and-mouth disease legislation with a view to updating it. Given the lessons learned from the 2001 outbreak and the wide range of legislation encompassing carcass disposal, animal health and welfare and compensation, what changes in legislation would you recommend the Department press for in Europe?

344.

Mr Meehan: It is not for me to comment on veterinary matters; however, there should be some mandatory requirement for consultation on the effect on the environment. There are many less contentious processes than the disposal of infected animals that require some form of environmental impact assessment. There should be a template to deal with emergencies. I can send the Committee further detail in a written response.

345.

The Chairperson: Thank you very much for your help. We are very concerned that there does not seem to have been a plan; rather, there seem to have been ad-hoc meetings to deal with difficulties as they arose. Most Committee members believe that an emergency contingency plan is needed now. A real plan with real structures and communications is needed before it is too late.

346.

There have been arguments about whether the issue should be dealt with on an all-Ireland basis because of the threat to agriculture North and South. Farms that straddle both sides of the border also pose a difficulty. If structures in Donegal are largely health-based and structures here are largely agriculture-based, there will be problems even before the start. We look forward to hearing from you.

<< Prev Next >>