This argument
was most succintly expressed last Thursday by the representative of the
Livestock Auctioneers Association, as a presentation of fact.
Once an animal, tagged for
life, is on the market with a no-export restriction, it will have a lower value
than a free passport beast - hence 2-tier market with the danger that someone
may shout -'well, if this isn't good enough for the Continentals, why is it
good enough for us' ...cue red-top outrage ... 'Ministers
in contaminated beef crisis' headlines (familiar?), a few more papers sold,
collapse of home market.
The fact that the prohibition on moving the
animals is an animal health risk reduction measure with no
implications for human health is likely to be overlooked.
The red-top sales
drive, is open to political exploitation ('questions in the House about this
very serious matter', etc), AND, perhaps most especially, will be driven by
rogues in the meat trade for price advantage. We are talking about
people running "legitimate businesses" who will not care what the cost to
animals, farmers or the taxpayer if they can clear a few million in the
process.
Several people have
expressed to me that this will be the bottom line - unscrupulous business
practice.
This is what DEFRA
need to get their heads around if they want a vaccination policy to work -
prearranged levels of compensation for loss of value on vaccinated, then
marketed, animals. Then prearranged agreements - tied in
via subsidies, planning terms or similar horse trading -
to stick to the national, not company interest, with swingeing "put
them out of business" penalties for infractions.
The problem would be
-'how do you trace whoever started a rumour' ?
A D Notice
prohibiting Press coverage? No, probably best not. We seem to be
stuck.
Ideas welcome. We need to
have this debate and to find answers asap .
Regards,
Chris.