The Law

In response to queries concerning who will decide what would have to be a Government decision, if implementation of a vaccination program to protect livestock is to be introduced following the outbreak of FMD in August 2007, the following excellent explanation was published by Mary Critchley on her web site Warmwell in response to a query from Henry Curteis, of Shrewsbury in Shropshire who wrote,

'Dear Mary,

French 24 TV channel says that Britain may decide to use vaccination this time. The Sunday Telegraph leader says that there has been an EU Europe-wide slaughter policy since 1992. Who is actually deciding what happens - the UK government, the EU, or does simply no one really know? Is that (what)would explain why FMD becomes such a critical event in Britain as it did in 2001.

In 1967 only herds that contracted the disease were slaughtered. Now they slaughter all adjacent farms as well and often more than that, so that millions of perfectly healthy farm animals were slaughtered in 2001. They've started with the same approach in the 2007 outbreak already slaughtering an adjacent farm. Does anyone know who is actually responsible for taking these decisions? Hilary Benn on Sunday morning TV showed no detailed technical knowledge at all.

Best, Henry Curteis, Shrewsbury, Shropshire'

Warmwell's reply -

'Dear Henry

I sympathise with your frustration and confusion. You're right. The politicians may well be - understandably - out of their depth. They are programmed not to admit this. They are relying on expert advice - which could be a little thin on the ground as far as the virology of FMD and the latest thinking on vaccination are concerned.

My own understanding is this: In the early 1990s Britain persuaded the rest of Europe in joining them in a non-vaccination policy. It seemed attractive because of the trade barrier benefits it confers via the WTO. But after the enormity of the UK and Dutch outbreaks in 2001 the EU felt it had to allow vaccination again. BUT it has allowed "discretion" to individual Member States - perhaps to save the blushes of idiotic UK government officials whose decisions in 2001 were so catastrophic.

So - although (being very careful indeed about the words they use) the UK has been parroting its willingness to "consider" vaccination ever since it became apparent what a mess they'd made, they are still very reluctant to put in jeopardy the profits of the UK meat trade - and also, of course, they don't want to land some very powerful "advisers" in the soup by tacitly admitting the science was so completely wrong. So no, the UK can prevaricate and is not forced by the EU to vaccinate against foot and mouth even now.

What's more, the UK officials have covered their backs legally this time by giving themselves powers (in the new Animal Health Act) to slaughter virtually anything they like, and it is an offence now to try to stop them - or even to refuse to cooperate.

Of course everything they do will have a veneer of scientific credibility (there are plenty of useful talking heads happy to pop up on television) "Dangerous contacts" sounds better than the infamous "contiguous cull" - and we are perhaps unlikely to hear much more about where the virus came from now.

I think the COBRA group may well have been advised that DEFRA can slaughter everything in a small radius to get rid of the, apparently, localised danger and thus put off emergency vaccination. I think this could be a big mistake. In theory, the Minister, Hilary Benn will take the decision - but as you so rightly say, he really has no experience or knowledge and is unlikely to know whether he is being correctly advised or not.

Thank you for writing. I think many people will be equally at sea, and like the rest of us, be feeling horribly powerless.

Mary