Yesterday, the new Welsh Minister for the Environment announced that he was commissioning an expert review of the scientific evidence surrounding bovine TB. This has been interpreted as either abandoning previous plans that the Welsh Assembly Government had for culling, or delaying them. So which is more likely, and what implications will the delay/abandonment have? Here's some thoughts:
1. Let's be clear. Reviewing a policy, commissioning expert reviews, appearing to delegate decisions to neutral and objective scientists is a standard tactic used by politicians. You only have to look at the history of decision making in TB (a good summary of which is provided by Wyn Grant - http://bit.ly/jRoWbL) to see that. But it wouldnt take you long to find other examples in other policy areas. Importantly, the "expert review" tactic works both ways: it can help politicians set agendas in whatever way they want: either by sinking unpopular policies or allowing them to legitimise unpopular policies. David King's review of the ISG is a good example of a review working in the other direction. And its the contested and uncertain nature of all scientific evidence that allows this to happen. That makes the political grandstanding, accusations and insults on all sides of the Senedd yesterday of no use to anyone.
2. Let's say you were new to the job and didnt know what to think so were seeking a delay: as a politician why would you actually commission a delay? This is a strange one, in many ways there was no need to do this. Everyone knows that the Badger Trust were likely to JR the new Tuberculosis Order. There's also a closed season, as well as the inevitable delays of planning etc. Did the WAG ever have a complete 'plan' ready to go anyway? All these things mean it would have been unlikely for a cull to proceed this year, or at least engineer to not go ahead this year without such an announcement. The minister could quite easily have commissioned a review into vaccination / setting up a vaccination trial to placate the wildlife groups whilst pretending to press on with a badger cull in the knowledge that it wouldnt be ready before England - which must be one of the other issues of concern. Machiavellian? Maybe, but thats politics isnt it?
3. So, poor politics but does that mean he's abandoning a cull? Quite possibly. Note that the minister is not calling for a review of the evidence of culling as most people have jumped on, but of all evidence. He also mentioned in his statement the need to keep an eye on all 'technological solutions'. That means vaccination. But it was strange that he didnt really mention vaccination, or adopt the tactic in (2) above. You might suggest that the twin vaccination / cull strategy might be the outcome of the review and the new policy committment. Perhaps. But that would also cost a lot more. And besides, (2) is better politics.
4. There are some wider issues of trust here too. If the public were interested in TB they'd be asking - as the oppositing parties did - why has the minister gone from voting for something to reviewing something in 91 days? If the press were interested they'd be saying this is just another example of how the public have lost trust in politicians. Of course, the reason why Labour voted for it (and some members of Plaid Cymru) was simply out of political expediency: it was part of the agreement they made in coalition. If the minister had simply admitted this it would have made him look a lot stronger than he did: its certainly not something the LibDems could have complained about.
5. The lack of consultation, even a phone call, with the farming industry looks appalling. Over the last 4 years the WAG have put in real efforts to engage with the farming industry and work with them - and not just the usual suspects. This has been a key factor in getting other regulations in place, and even ensuring compliance with existing regulations (see below). Farmers believed that something was going to be done: they trusted the government. This trust was also the main difference between England and Wales: the institutional and cultural distance between government and farmers was a lot closer, it allows things to get done, not spiral out of control into shouting matches. All that work may have been undone in a stroke - its sad and dangerous. Of course, you might say, that this trust was borne out of compromise: a badger cull for our compliance. This is true, and it exposes some of the limitations of close policy communities, whether they are with stakeholders like farmers, or technical advisors such as scientists. But essentially that is what regulation and policy is about - a balancing act between what is desirable and what is possible.
6. Finally, what effect is this going to have on farmers? Arent they just going to run out and shoot badgers themselves? Quite possibly. Very likely - see some of my research on this (http://bit.ly/jR2HPQ). This really is the elephant in the room. Its the secret that no-one likes to talk about: that this goes on is known by everyone associated with TB policy, yet quite possibly it lies at the heart of problems associated with TB. It raises some uncomfortable questions: what is the point of the badger protection act if its not being enforced; what is the point of it if it can't be enforced? Who benefits from such a situation? No-one. Wildlife groups will no doubt say that more money should be spent on enforcement - but thats very unlikely. In fact wildlife conservation has always been something of a Big Society policy, even before Cameron dreamed up those words. So there wont be any change there. What's happened is that twin objectives of nature conservation and disease eradication have become associated - that's a dangerous combination which as Wyn Grant and I have explained creates an intractable policy environment. Piecemeal approaches to TB policy are unlikely to deal with this, more radical blank sheet approaches might - when regulations don't work starting afresh may be the best option. That no-one is really prepared to have those fundamental debates suggests that resolving the problem TB is not going to go away quickly.
All papers mentioned above are available from me for free.
