BVA Annual Welsh Dinner - Dr R M McCracken's Presidential Speech
Cardiff Castle - 28 April 2005
My Lord, Madam President, colleagues and distinguished guests, I bid you a warm welcome on behalf of the British Veterinary Association and our North and South Wales divisions to this year’s annual Welsh Dinner here in the lovely settings of Cardiff Castle. It is my pleasure and privilege to be here and it is made even more pleasurable by the fine company around me.
Agriculture has always lived in times of change but we appear to be dealing with times of unprecedented, accelerated change. CAP reform is beginning to be implemented in at least 4 ways within the UK. Imported food appears to be the preferred option of our policy makers. Endemic diseases are still with us and demand our time and money. I will come back to bovine tuberculosis in a moment. We live in a global village where the threat from an epizootic disease such as FMD, avian influenza and West Nile Fever is ever present and the threat is considerably greater today than it was 10 years ago. We live in the UK where farm animal vets are getting fewer and fewer, and older and older – despite a record number of new graduates emerging each year. The BVA (and its Specialist Divisions such as the British Cattle Veterinary Association) recognises and accepts that today’s vet must meet the needs of the modern farmer by making a significant contribution to the farmer’s business. I believe that our profession is equipped to assist the farmer be successful.
Epidemic diseases and the global village. Let’s recognise reality. FMD will be back with us and our actions and plans must reflect that reality! We (Government, farmers & the veterinary profession, in partnership) have three areas of defence:
1. Have a programme in place to keep FMD virus out; especially illegal meat importations;
2. Have a protocol in place that will detect the disease on the first (and not 51st) premises; and
3. Have a programme in place that will ensure effective and efficient eradication of the disease from our farms.
Government has worked hard on the last of these three areas and I am aware that the prevention of the introduction of FMD disease figures highly on Wales’ priorities. We certainly need more than 10 “sniffer” dogs for the entire UK!
An Animal Health & Welfare Strategy has been published and it contains elements of epidemic disease surveillance. But we must all work more urgently if we are to find the first case on the first farm. We are required to manage a crisis when we find FMD on the first farm and we are all capable of doing so. We are required to manage a catastrophe when we find FMD on the fifty-first farm and we were not capable of doing so in 2001! Our livestock industry demands an effective surveillance system and I fail to see how such can be accomplished without the presence of a vet on a farm.
Farming economics have ensured that many sheep farms have not seen a vet since 2001. In the interests of epidemic disease this is unacceptable. The BVA is thus encouraged to note the way that SEERAD and Minister Ross Finnie are implementing the AH&WS in Scotland. A Scheme, overseen by an Advisory Board (chaired by the Minister and with NFU and BVA representatives) aimed at improving farming conditions in Scotland. The BVA looks forward to similar Schemes in Wales, N Ireland and England.
It would be irresponsible of me to sit down without referring to the on-going saga of bovine TB control. I spent many years in N Ireland, trying to deal with bovine TB in the absence of a similar control programme in the badger. The programme was originally an eradication programme but Government’s recognition of the reservoir role played by the infected badger ensured that “eradication” became “control”.
The farming community in Wales has every right to be concerned about bovine tuberculosis. The current control programme has been ineffective on two main fronts:
- Reducing the incidence in hot-spot areas; and
- Preventing the spread of the disease outwards from the hot-spot areas. Outwards within Wales and northwards and eastwards from Gloucester and the South West.
It is a scientific fact that the two major animals in the persistence and spread of TB are the badger and the bovine. Government also accept this fact. Logic dictates that if a disease is to be controlled then the major reservoirs of infection must be addressed.
Success in reducing the incidence in hot-spot areas centres upon the infected badger. We must control infection in the badger. The continued survival of the infected badger ensures repeated breakdowns on farms. This is soul-destroying for any farmer.
However, success in preventing the spread of the disease outwards from the hot-spot areas centres upon the infected bovine animal. TB will arrive in Cumbria and Yorkshire through the infected bovine; not the infected badger.
The issue of the infected bovine has been addressed and tackled. Whilst we believe that the infected bovine is also a source of infection for clean cattle we rightly regard the badger as the critical element. Many European countries have eliminated TB from their cattle and whilst they did not have to deal with infected badgers they did have to deal with infected and infective cattle. Thus it is evident that the wildlife reservoir is the critical factor in achieving control and eradication.
The issue of the infected badger has been considered. But no infected-badger control measure has been introduced. The infected badger must be controlled and removed – we are no longer debating if the infected badger should be removed; what we are debating is HOW to do so in an effective manner.
In this context, it is encouraging to note that your Minister here in Wales has established a TB Action Group. I understand that, from this group, there is a proposal to form Intensive Treatment Areas, in which, amongst many other considerations, is the possibility of taking control measures on infected wildlife. A logical, sensible and welcome approach.
We must also all recognise and accept that the tools available for the control of TB and the control of its spread are rather poor. No one tool will eradicate TB. Pre-movement testing of a single animal or a small group of a herd is better than not testing, but a negative result does not mean that the tested animal is uninfected. The sensitivity of the test tells us clearly that a pre-movement test will detect the single, infected animal in two out of every three herds. If we rely solely on a pre-movement test we will transport infected cattle around the country. The pre-movement test has been employed for many years in GB – for cattle imported from N Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. In spite of such testing TB breakdowns occur in Scotland as a consequence of imported, negative testing, Irish cattle!
The BVA recognises that infected wildlife, especially the badger, cannot and must not be ignored. We accept that there is sound scientific evidence that the infected badger is a major source of TB for clean cattle. We accept fully that eradication (and more effective control) cannot be achieved without addressing the infected badger and the reservoir and the threat that it represents to cattle. Government must take the lead role in addressing this element and the veterinary and farming professions have a responsibility to ensure that Government does so in an effective manner. Following publication of the Irish work, it is difficult to envisage what additional useful and applicable information will come out of the remains of the ongoing Krebs Trial.
A consequence of the seriousness of concerns over bovine TB is that the NFU and the BVA are planning a response to Government’s recent proposals. Such an alliance is most appropriate and beneficial. The farming and veterinary professions have many goals in common and our interdependence should be recognised and optimised more than it has in the past.
Convivial as your company is, I too have no wish to spend the night here at the podium, but cannot let the opportunity pass without reminding you that as a result of the Marsh Report, and more recently the Competition Commission inquiry, changes in the dispensing of veterinary medicines are to occur. The BVA is in no doubt that it is inevitable that these changes will reduce the income of the farm animal vet and with it the survival of farm animal practice. We remain concerned that the doctrinaire views of the Competition Commission and DTI have been pursued without reference to the welfare of animals and public safety. And, contrary to the express intent of the Competition Commission inquiry, veterinary fees will inevitably rise.
In conclusion, the agri-food industry continues to face increasingly difficult challenges. Food can be imported from outside the EU, often at below EU-production costs. High standards of animal welfare and food safety are demanded of our farmers whilst the perception is that such demands are not imposed on our rivals.
Notwithstanding these challenges it is right and proper that animals are reared in an environment that ensures proper welfare and health standards. The BVA will continue to strive to work in partnership with farmers and with Government to maintain and enhance the health and welfare of our animals and of consumers of animal products. Whilst we can have different views we do work closely and effectively with the farming unions. We also work closely with Government. But “consultation” is not “partnership” and we believe that whilst Government must continue to consult they must also play their part in providing an environment where meaningful partnerships and alliances can be built – and where they are truly synergistic. Our future lies in effective partnerships at Government, farming and veterinary levels; and at devolved Assembly, National and European levels.
Little is achieved through conflict; much can be achieved through partnership.
For further information please contact the BVA Press Office on 020 7636 6541 or email chrissien@bva.co.uk or helenac@bva.co.uk