|
JOHN HUMPHRYS: The Agriculture Minister
Nick Brown is going to Brussels tomorrow for a meeting with other European
ministers to decide what to do about BSE, mad cow disease. It's now affecting
the whole of Europe ... not just us. The question they're facing is whether
to bring in the sort of controls that we've seen in this country... or
go even further.
On Wednesday there was a
meeting of the European Veterinary Scientific Committee which discussed
a ban on including fish meal and bits of chickens in animal feed. British
vets at the meeting opposed the ban. So what happens now? Mr Brown is
with me - good afternoon Mr Brown.
BROWN: I think I should make it
clear that British vets ONLY opposed the ban because the Commission asked
us to so that the issue could be dealt with by ministers rather than at
the Veterinary Committee. It's not a policy decision.
HUMPHRYS: So they didn't look at
the science of it, which was my understanding, correct me if I'm wrong,
they looked at the science of it and thought independently of whatever
they had or might not have been asked to do - but this wasn't the right
thing to do, to oppose this ban?
BROWN: No, that isn't what happened.
It's purely a technical decision so that the issue can be dealt with by
ministers on Monday rather than be dealt within the Veterinary Committee.
That was the only reason and they did it at the Commission's request.
HUMPHRYS: Do we not know what their
view is then on this one?
BROWN: Yes we do and in fact we're
supporting the Commission.....
HUMPHRYS: No... no... I mean the
view of the scientists.
BROWN: The view at the Veterinary
Committee was that the Commission are right to be extending the controls,
controls remember that we've had in place here since 1996 to the rest of
the European Union but the Commission believe, and I think our own veterinary
officials were right on this, that the decision should be made by ministers
not in an administrative sub-committee of the European Union, albeit a
very important one.
HUMPHRYS: So what is our view?
BROWN: Our view is that we support
the Commission's call for measures across the European Union. Remember
we're trying to do two things: Above all we're trying to protect the
public, the European Union's public from variant Creutzfeld Jacob's Disease.
We're trying to prevent the spread of BSE in European Union herds and
thirdly, and this point often gets overlooked but it's of fundamental importance,
we're trying not only to exterminate BSE but to prevent a recurrence.
HUMPHRYS: So in practical terms
what will change as a result of tomorrow's decision? I mean I'm assuming
that tomorrow's decision from what you're telling me is more or less a
fait accompli. I mean that is it: The Commission says 'do it - it will
be done' because you'll agree with what the Commission says
BROWN: A majority of member states
are in favour of the broad thrust of the Commission's proposals. Although
there may be some discussion around the details, essentially the Commission
are taking actions that are very similar although admittedly not identical
to the ones that were taken here back in nineteen ninety-six. It's a feed
stuffs ban in other words. The feed stuffs no longer contain, will be
allowed to contain not just.... It's not just a ruminant feed ban, they're
also proposing an exclusion of fish meal, the exclusion of protein derived
from poultry as well and that's a very significant decision and allied
to their proposals for a thirty month scheme, not quite the same as the
one we have here - that all animals are either tested if they're over thirty
months for BSE or they are kept out of the food chain is the proposal,
and of course any animal that fails the test will be kept out of the food
chain, and these are pretty powerful measures.
HUMPHRYS: And don't they go a bit
beyond what we're doing at the moment, because at the moment, am I not
right in thinking, farmers can if they wish feed cows, talking particularly
about ruminants talking about cows, stuff like fish meal and meal that
you get from grinding up chickens even chicken feathers I gather. At the
moment they can do that.
BROWN: You're right, the poultry
derived protein and fish meal derived protein is still used in animal feed
stuffs here, that's still lawful just as it's lawful at the moment throughout
the European Union. The Commission's proposal is not to do that: In other
words they're going beyond the scientific advice available to ministers
and clearly that's something we want to explore with them tomorrow. But
if it comes down to going... to having to going further than the scientists
advise or not doing anything at all I can tell you that Britain will be
voting to go further.
HUMPHRYS: To go further. So in
other words even though the scientists may say 'we think it's okay to feed
bits of fish and bits of chickens to cows,' you, on behalf of Britain
would say, 'We don't. We do not want to do that.'?
BROWN: Look, I want to listen to
what my colleagues have to say. I think it is absolutely right that we
try and get a decision, a single decision that will work for the whole
of the European Union, but if it's a choice between taking action or not
taking action then we're going to take action and do so on Monday.
HUMPHRYS: Right. So to be quite
clear about this, it's your view as Agriculture Minister of this country,
it's your view that it is not generally a good idea to feed bits of meat
of any sort, whether we're talking fish or chicken or whatever it is to
cows, that would normally not eat it in other words?
BROWN: I mean actually you're right
- that probably is the underpinning principle behind the Commission's proposal
but it goes further than the science and I've said repeatedly that the
decisions that our government makes in this area will be based on the science
but this is a discussion amongst colleagues in the European Union and if
the other member states wish to take the Commission's proposal as it is
without amendment then we will too - even if it goes further than the science,
strictly speaking.
HUMPHRYS: Why, why are you so hung
up on what the scientists say. I mean, you might say well it's the only
guide we've got. But if you look at a wee bit of history, you don't have
to go back terribly far, we discovered that actually, a lot of the things
that the scientists said we could do, we should never have done.
BROWN: Well, I mean, I have the
Phillips Report now to guide me in all of this and one of the points that
Lord Phillips makes in his report is that politicians can't shuffle off
their responsibilities. He uses more elegant language than that, but that
what he means by calling for yet another scientific enquiry, or waiting
until the science is certain, and that is why I say if it's a choice between
going further than the scientific advice or making no decision, then we
will have to go further than the scientific advise. It is essential that
we bear down on BSE in the European herd, it is essential that we protect
European citizens from the horrors of Variant Creutzfeld Jacobs disease
and I am determined to do that.
HUMPHRYS: How much of this is to
do with, putting aside the science for the moment, with simply restoring
public confidence, because there's no doubt, public confidence has been
absolutely shattered.
BROWN: Well, I think one of the
thinkings behind the introduction of the thirty months scheme is to deal
with the impact that the loss of public confidence has had on the market-place
in the European Union, in other words, animals that are not particularly
the older animals, that are just not being purchased, will be able to go
into the scheme, and frankly, that's a market intervention.
HUMPHRYS: Some of the blame in
this whole area, and I mean there has been blame flying around in all directions,
has been directed at us, from the French in particular, for exporting what
they regard as dodgy animal feed. Are they right to blame us?
BROWN: Well, it is true that animal
feed that was banned for sale in Britain was still allowed to be sold abroad
and some of it was purchased in France. But the people who purchased it
would have known that it was banned for sale here, I think looking back
on it, that the, that the government was wrong to allow that to happen,
and indeed the Phillips Report sets out the circumstances. But, frankly,
looking from nation state to nation state for other countries to blame
is not the right way to deal with this.
HUMPHRYS: No, but it ....
BROWN: ...there isn't a nationalistic
solution to the problems of BSE, the prion protein doesn't know national
boundaries. What we've got to do is to make sure that we've got thorough
public protection measures, and separately, thorough animal protection
measures, in place, throughout the European Union, and that's what we're
setting out to do.
HUMPHRYS: But it has, but it has
come down to a nationalistic thing, hasn't it? I mean, it frequently does
where France and this country are concerned. I mean, they are still refusing
to lift their ban on our beef. Well, when you look at the sort of things
we've just been talking about, it's quite easy to understand why they want
to do that, isn't it?
BROWN: No, the date-based export
scheme is for under thirty month beef, it's de-boned, er, it has been inspected
by just about every veterinary official that has wanted to come and inspect
it, we are being completely open about the way in which we are operating
it. It has been approved unanimously by the scientific committee that
advises the European Union, the Council of Ministers have said that it's
well-founded in law, and that it is right to lift the ban, so the French
are wrong on the science and wrong on the law. They ought to lift their
ban.
HUMPHRYS: Well if, well if, if
they won't accept our assurances that our beef is safe...
BROWN: ...this isn't our assurance...
HUMPHRYS: ...well alright no...
BOTH SPEAKING TOGETHER
BROWN: ...it's the European Union's
Assurance...
HUMPHRYS: ...withdraw the word
'our'...
BOTH SPEAKING TOGETHER
BROWN: ...I mean on the one hand
they're protesting like mad...
HUMPHRYS: ...yeah...
BROWN: ...that other countries
are taking national measures against France...
HUMPHRYS: ...okay...
BROWN: ...and yet, and yet they've
gone ahead and taken national measures against us.
HUMPHRYS: Well, given that, given
that they won't accept the assurances that our beef is safe, why do we
accept their assurances that their beef is safe?
BROWN: Now, we know, we know the
instance of BSE currently in France is at very low level, that is why we
are discussing across the European Union what public protection measures
it is necessary to put in place across the European Union to safeguard
the European Union's herds and at the same time to safeguard the public.
But remember we already have very powerful public protection measures
in place in this country and specifically of course the fact that it is
unlawful to sell any beef derived from animals over thirty months, whether
from France, or from Ireland, or from within the UK or anywhere else...
HUMPHRYS: ...but your colleague...
BROWN: ...in the European Union...
HUMPHRYS: But your colleague in
France, the French minister Mr de Glavany doesn't seem to think so He
said what was it: "Conduct the same test to your cattle as we're conducting
to ours, after that we shall see".
BROWN: Well the testing regime
of course will apply throughout the European Union including here. What
it won't apply to is to animals that are over thirty months, although we
do test some for experimental purposes we're not going to test every single
animal that is destined for the incinerator. They are - none of them go
into the food chain. That is why it's such a powerful public protection
measure, but in terms of the testing regime we have an extensive testing
regime for the purposes of seeing how far BSE had spread in the ageing
herd in place now, and as I said to the French on a number of occasions,
we're more than happy to share the fruits of our testing regime with them
and with anyone else
HUMPHRYS: The trouble is from your
point of view and from our point of view it isn't just the French who are
worried about it is it. I mean the French have their ban certainly but
we're seeing an increasing number of politicians in Germany, the lenders
and now the regions in Germany are now saying to the German government,
the federal government, look, we need this EU-wide ban on British beef
reinstated. I mean that's going to be a problem for you.
BROWN: I know politicians in this
country who take the same nationalistic view. Listen to William Hague
and Tim Yeo saying that all French beef should be banned. It's their equivalents
in Germany who are saying that all British beef should be banned. We're
not going to be able to deal with this in nationalistic terms and it is
a mistake to try.
HUMPHRYS: You must be worried though
about this movement now in Germany. I mean it is building up isn't it?
BROWN: Well, I think it would be
absolutely wrong for the German government to try to impose a ban on British
beef through the date-based export scheme, but remember the quantities
of beef that we sold to Germany historically were very, very small...
HUMPHRYS: That's not the point
though is it, the size....
BROWN: It's not as if there's some
great practical issue being tested here
HUMPHRYS: No, but that isn't the
point is it, how much they buy from us. It's the message it sends. I
mean if we were to find that the French stick to their ban as they intend
to do clearly, the Germans manage to get it reinstated, then good heavens,
we're back to where we were.
BROWN: But the issue is to protect
the public throughout Europe, not try to get into a series of bilateral
trade wars, product by product and state by state. That would be a mistake,
and the solution will be found in a European Union context.
HUMPHRYS: Nick Brown, thank you
very much indeed.
|