Speech by Jonathan Shaw MP at the Responsibility and Cost Sharing Regional Workshop, Exeter - 13 February 2008
Introduction1. Thank you for that introduction. Could I also thank everyone for coming to discuss this very important topic. I’m aware that responsibility and cost sharing is for many a contentious issue, which makes it all the more important that those who will be directly affected by it get every opportunity to influence how it will work and what it will cover. That is the purpose of our consultation and the 12 regional workshops we are holding around the country, of which this is the first.
2. I want to set the scene for discussion today, say a bit about the timing of the consultation and what I hope we can get out of this process.
3. I need to mention Bovine TB which is a huge concern in the South West. The government is awaiting the report from the current enquiry by the parliamentary select committee reviewing this issue before making any further statements about its future policy.
So how do these proposals fit in with our overall vision for farming?
4. Animal health and disease control is a vital component for a profitable and competitive industry at home and abroad. An industry that earns its way because of the quality of the food and food products it produces, and the high safety, environmental and animal welfare standards that apply to the production process.
5. But animal health and disease control are also important for public health, for wildlife, the wider environment and society at large. So it is right that the public, as taxpayers, should pay an appropriate proportion of the cost of maintaining animal health and disease control.
6. In 2004 our Animal Health and Welfare Strategy set out our vision for the future. Partnership working and a clear understanding of roles and responsibilities are key elements in achieving that vision.
7. Current disease control arrangements do not reward those farmers who actively manage the risk of disease – those who are rigorous about biosecurity and vigilant in checking for disease. The Government is currently spending around £400 million a year on animal disease, with the costs of any exotic disease outbreaks coming on top of that. About a quarter of this expenditure is by the department’s Executive Agency “Animal Health” (formerly known as the state veterinary service).
8. There is scope to reduce total expenditure by reducing the incidence of disease and making further efficiencies. But the level of Government funding is unfair to the taxpayer as well as unsustainable in the face of competing priorities.
9. Sharing costs goes hand in hand with sharing responsibility for decision-making. If the industry is to pick up a greater share of the costs of animal health and welfare, as it must, it is only right that the livestock sector should have a direct say in the decisions that affect them in this area. No-one understands farmers and farming and the challenges they face in dealing with animal disease better than the industry itself.
How about Timing?
10. Why now? People say we should not be discussing this ‘now’ given the events of last summer and the origin of the foot and mouth disease. Undoubtedly last year saw one of the most difficult years for disease that we have known – certainly since 2001
Let me give you the background.
11. Firstly, we have not just started on this issue. Defra has been in discussion with the farming industry on responsibility and cost sharing since the Classical Swine Fever outbreak in 2000. The Anderson inquiry into the 2001 Foot and Mouth outbreak highlighted the need for sharing disease costs with those involved: that those who benefit should pay.
12. In this long-running engagement, the July 2006 report of the Joint (Industry/Government) Working Group on Sharing Responsibilities and Costs of Animal Disease marked a step change in thinking by both Government and industry. That report recognised that there were real benefits for both Government and the livestock industry in partnership working. It also acknowledged that the distribution of animal disease costs needed to better reflect where the balance of responsibilities lie for managing disease risks.
13. In December 2006 there was a UK wide consultation on a set of principles for responsibility and cost-sharing. At the same time the UK Consultative Forum on Responsibility and Cost Sharing was established. It includes representatives from the Devolved Administrations and the farming unions from the four home countries. The Forum accepted the objective of working towards recommendations on a new approach and will be feeding in their views to Ministers by the Summer.
14. Secondly the events since last summer, in responding to the FMD and Bluetongue outbreaks in particular, have shown how important industry involvement is to making the best decisions in tackling disease outbreaks. We can and will build on this experience in formulating our new approach.
15. Thirdly the overall framework is not going to change overnight. This is too complex and too important to make hasty decisions. We have to ensure that whatever solutions we do arrive at, that we fully understand what they mean for different sectors. Whether you’re a pig farmer, a sheep farmer, or a poultry keeper; wherever you farm and whatever the size of your farm and your income, the arrangements need to work and it needs to be understood how they will work.
16. But we do have to begin the debate now and start to work out what the arrangements might look like for us in order to have them in place to tackle new disease threats in a few years time when proposals for the whole of the EU will be under discussion.
17. So finally, just around the corner is the EU animal health strategy, which is looking at responsibility and cost sharing proposals across Member States. Early negotiations only included cost sharing – as practiced already in many EU countries. We have done well to get responsibility sharing onto the EU agenda, but we must be in a position to influence this debate to secure proportionate outcomes which recognise the unique structures and dynamics of our livestock sectors. That means talking about the options now. As it is, they will not be in place before the end of the decade. By having the discussions now we can lead and influence the debate and not be passive recipients of what comes out of the discussions.
Let me turn to the Consultation
18. This consultation is a Government document for England, but its preparation was discussed with the UK Consultative Forum and the EIG (England Implementation Group for Animal Health and Welfare). This consultation is a vital part of the process for developing the right structures and mechanisms for building and evolving partnership working. We published an extended 18 week consultation before Christmas seeking views on the next steps. The consultation closes on 15 April. It is split into two parts, but only the first part is of concern to us today.
19. Katrina Williams will be saying more about what is in the document shortly, but Part one, our focus today, is about developing a new long term framework for establishing responsibility and cost sharing. Part two makes some specific proposals for the industry to take on and manage the responsibility and costs for a number of discrete activities in respect of BSE and scrapie.
20. Now is the time for you to influence how we can share the costs – who should pay what, when and how – and how the industry can be in the driving seat of taking the decisions that directly affect them. The intention is that Ministers relinquish at least some of their direct responsibility for decisions on disease control measures, for example animal testing, movement controls, and vaccination programmes.
21. These decisions often require balancing different interests, views and taking account of the scientific evidence and expert advice. So the answers are not always obvious or easy. We are particularly interested to know what kinds of decisions and responsibilities you think the industry should take on or share.
22. This is an open consultation. The document lays out a range of possible options but Ministers do not have fixed views on which of these should be pursued. We want to hear what you and others in the industry think before we take decisions.
23. I know that the level of Devolved Administrations involvement in progressing responsibility and cost sharing is of concern to many.
24. We are keen to develop a UK or GB approach to animal health and welfare – which recognises that GB is a single epidemiological unit for disease control purposes.. After all diseases don’t respect borders and we need to work together to address them.
25. Over the past 18 months at least, the Devolved Administrations have been closely engaged in discussions on the responsibility and cost sharing agenda: at official level, through the UK Consultative Forum and Ministerial bilateral meetings.
26. Devolution, of necessity, means that Defra’s consultation is an England only exercise. But while the timing may not match exactly, I understand that a consultation is planned shortly for Wales and I have every expectation that consultations in Scotland and Northern Ireland will follow thereafter.
In Conclusion
27. This is an important stage of our policy development. Vital that everyone potentially affected by the proposals get the opportunity to feed comments into this consultation.
28. This workshop, here today in Exeter, is your opportunity to understand more about the options set out in the consultation and to help shape the new arrangements. We want to know how the changes can best be made to work for you.
29. So I look forward to your comments and feedback from the discussion today and in the future. These will ultimately inform Ministers and officials in developing further proposals this Autumn.
Thank you Ladies and Gentlemen.
Page last modified:
Page published: 15 February 2008