Hansard Badger cull debate

The House of Commons, October 2012: An imagined badger cull debate.

Rt Hon David Heath MP: “Controlling animal disease is not easy. My Rt Hon Friend may suggest it is an exact science. I beg to differ. And it is for those reasons that I am recommending a badger cull.

As scientists have agreed, a badger cull could reduce incidence of bovine TB by around 28% under the same conditions used by previous scientific badger culling trials. We are not using those same conditions. You might say that invalidates our approach. You might say that makes me “anti-science”. I say not. I say it makes our approach no more or less scientific than the Rt Hon Lady's vaccination plan - a plan with no scientific results to say what effect it might have.

Let me outline the reasons behind our decision as follows.

First, to the matter of science. We are not following the culling protocol laid down by the ISG for good reasons. It is simply too expensive. No-one can afford it. Just like vaccination, we do not know if what we are proposing will work. It might. It might not. We could commission a series of new trials to scientifically prove whether it has made a difference or not. To be clear, that is not the purpose of these trials. That would take many years, and the time for action is now.

Instead, we’ve tried to be innovative: to push the boundaries of knowledge, to push the rules. We think what we’ve come up with in that respect should work. But if it does not, we will have one indicator of success or failure: farmers. As my predecessor pointed out, it will be up to farmers to decide whether they want to do this. It will be up to them to pay for it. And if they don’t think its working, then they wont bother. They say you learn by failing: well this is their chance.

Second, Mr Speaker, the aim of our decision is to develop ownership. A clear conclusion of the ISG’s research was that without ownership TB eradication is dead in the water. Experience from other countries show us that without farmer involvement, disease control programmes do not work. You may suggest offering a carrot in this way is unacceptable: but how else do you think we will be able to implement further regulations on cattle movements, risk based trading, and use of more powerful diagnostics that will identify even more infected cattle? As research has shown, without farmer’s believing they have a chance, none of these other measures will have much impact. We have no intention of regulating farmers out of business. It is only by working with them farmers that we will get anywhere with this disease. The means justify the ends

Without this, I would very much like to hear from my honourable friends how they would propose incentivizing positive biosecurity behavious amongst farmers. Are they proposing more regulation? How much will that cost? What will you do about non-compliance? How successful will you be?

No, Mr Speaker. The history of animal disease has always been is one of seeking this balance – a trade off. It is the very reason why farmers are compensated in animal disease outbreaks. It is nothing new. It is the history of animal disease. And it is the way to get things done.

Lastly Mr Speaker, I want to draw attention to the idea that better biosecurity offers a realistic solution to this crisis. As I have indicated, I will be bringing forward new cattle testing procedures and movement restrictions in the coming months. These will make a difference. But suggestions that removing reactors from farms a day or so earlier will make a difference are far from the mark. It is rather like putting on a seatbelt after you have crashed your car. If we are to debate biosecurity, lets stick to the key issues, not be distracted by the kinds of meaningless activities that are only done to make people think they are actually doing something worthwhile.

Mr Speaker, science says a badger cull may work. It might not. This badger cull will allow us to introduce further regulations to help curb bovine TB. It is for this reason alone that a badger cull is meaningful.

Mr Speaker: Order! Order! I call the Rt Hon member for Wakefield...