Website Content

Jump to footer

Peers question badger cull proposals

BBC NEWS - DEMOCRACY LIVE
16 November 2010
The government's plan to cull badgers in an effort to protect cattle from bovine tuberculosis (TB) has come under fire in the Lords.

Lord Krebs, author of a 1997 report that led to a randomised badger culling trial, and Lord May of Oxford, a former government chief scientific adviser, both questioned the merits of the scheme.

At question time in the House of Lords on 16 November 2010, farming minister Lord Henley said the scientific advice was "quite clear" that badger culling could be effective.

He said that more than 25,000 cattle had to be compulsorily slaughtered last year and described bovine TB as "Britain's biggest endemic animal health issue".

Lord Krebs asked him: "Do you agree with the estimate of your own officials that, based on the results of the randomised badger culling trials, long-term intensive culling of badgers would lead to a 16% reduction in the incidence of TB in cattle over a nine-year period?

"Even this very modest reduction, leaving 84% of the problem unaffected, would be only achievable with highly-effective, large-scale long-term culling, otherwise culling will make the problem worse."

Lord Henley replied: "On-going monitoring since the end of those trials has indicated that the positive impacts on herd breakdowns within the culled areas have continued to last a considerable number of years after they ended and have seen a reduction of some 28% in those areas

"So, there is a reduction and it is a considerable reduction. We have never said that culling is the sole answer.

"We have always made it clear that we believe that there will be other measures that need to be taken and we need every tool in the toolbox."

------

HANSARD TRANSCRIPT:

Bovine Tuberculosis Question

2.48 pm
Asked By Lord Krebs

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what scientific evidence they hold which supports their proposals for control of bovine tuberculosis.

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Lord Henley):
My Lords, scientific evidence indicates that TB in cattle will not be eliminated without addressing transmission from badgers. The evidence used to estimate the impact of badger culling and vaccination on TB incidence in cattle is set out in our consultation document. For culling, much of the evidence comes from the randomised badger-culling trial, which was recommended by the noble Lord in 1997. For vaccination, it comes from laboratory and field studies.

Lord Krebs:
I thank the Minister for that helpful Answer. As he has indicated, I declare an interest as the author of the 1997 report that led to the so-called randomised badger-culling trials, which were set up to test whether culling is an effective way of controlling TB in cattle. I ask the Minister two questions. First, does he agree with the estimate of his own officials that, based on the results of the randomised badger-culling trials, long-term intensive culling of badgers would lead to a 16 per cent reduction in the incidence of TB in cattle over nine years? Even this modest reduction, which would leave 84 per cent of the problem unaffected, would be achievable only with highly effective, large-scale, long-term culling. Otherwise, culling will make the problem worse. Secondly, does the Government’s Chief Scientific Adviser, Sir John Beddington, agree with the policy of culling?

Lord Henley:
My Lords, on the first question, I accept what the noble Lord has to say, but ongoing monitoring since the end of those trials indicates that the positive impacts on herd breakdowns within the culled areas have lasted for a considerable number of years after the culls have ended and that those areas have seen a reduction of some 28 per cent in the incidence of TB. So there is a considerable reduction. We have never said that culling is the sole answer. We have always made it clear that we believe that other measures will need to be taken and that we need to use every tool in the toolbox. As I made clear to the noble Lord in Written Answers earlier this year, we have consulted both the Government Chief Scientific Adviser, Sir John Beddington, and our own chief scientific adviser within the department.

Baroness Browning:
My Lords, I was the Minister who set up the committee so ably taken forward by the noble Lord, Lord Krebs. Back in 1997, we recognised that bovine tuberculosis was out of control. It had spread down from the moors in the south-west peninsula and has since come south, right down almost to the coast across Devon, Cornwall and Somerset. It has also spread to Gloucestershire, has headed up to Herefordshire and is now up as far as Cumbria. Has my noble friend looked at the research work being carried out in the Republic of Ireland, particularly in East Offaly? Certainly, prior to setting up the inquiry into bovine tuberculosis, the then Government looked at how culling had been used in the Republic of Ireland. I hope that he will take that research work into account.

Lord Henley:
My Lords, I thank my noble friend for that question. I assure her that we have looked at research carried out in all countries. It is clear that one cannot eradicate bovine TB without also addressing TB in the wild animal population. That seems clear from the evidence in all other countries. My noble friend is also right to emphasise to the House the importance of this issue. Last year more than 25,000 cattle had to be compulsorily slaughtered. We think that bovine TB is Britain’s biggest endemic animal health issue.

Lord Brooke of Alverthorpe:
My Lords, in answer to the noble Lord, Lord Krebs, the Minister said that the Government had consulted the Chief Scientific Adviser. Can he say whether the Chief Scientific Adviser is in favour of, or opposed to, a cull?

Lord Henley:My Lords, I refer the noble Lord to the Written Answer that I gave some time ago which stated that he had been consulted, was aware of what we were doing and was happy with the consultation that was taking place. I make it clear that it is only a consultation that we are conducting on this matter at the moment.

Lord Greaves:
My Lords, does the Minister agree that any pilots that take place, whether they involve culling or vaccination or both, should have independent monitoring, data collection, analysis and assessment if they are to have credibility and be of use?

Lord Henley:
The important thing to emphasise to my noble friend is the fact that we are at this stage only consulting on a badger control policy. Having consulted and taken advice, we then propose to issue licences to farmers and others who wish to cull and/or vaccinate badgers at their own expense. We will then look at the results of that process.

Lord May of Oxford:
My Lords, does the Minister agree that while there remain uncertainties, two things are known: first, that in the initial several years after beginning to kill badgers in a defined region, things get worse; and, secondly, if culling is maintained over a large area year in and year out, control of bovine TB is possible to a degree but the balance of evidence suggests that the costs outweigh the benefits? Incidentally, I take it that I am clear that the answer he gave about the chief scientist being content with the consultation is that he does not agree. That seemed to be implied in the Minister’s reply.

Lord Henley:
My Lords, that is not the case at all. I have made it clear that we have consulted the Chief Scientific Adviser and he is happy with the consultation. What we are talking about at this stage is a consultation. I also make it clear to the noble Lord that the scientific evidence is clear and suggests that an active badger culling carried out on a sufficient scale—I emphasise the words “sufficient scale”—in a widespread, co-ordinated and efficient way over a sustained period will reduce the incidence of bovine TB in cattle in high-incidence areas.

Baroness Quin:
May I therefore ask the Minister, in view of his reply, whether there will be a cull or not, because there is confusion within the Government? At precisely the same time as the Minister of State was announcing to farmers that there was going to be a cull, the Secretary of State said that she would await the scientific evidence. Which is it?

Lord Henley:
My Lords, there is no confusion in the Government at all. We have made it quite clear that we are consulting on this issue. When we consult, we consult for those reasons. We do not consult, as the party opposite did, having already made up our minds.

 

Past News

brianmay.com
Bookmark and Share