Foot-and-Mouth Disease (Farmers’ Losses)

Oral Answers to Questions — Agriculture and Rural Development – in the Northern Ireland Assembly at 3:45 pm on 30 April 2001.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of David Ford David Ford Alliance 3:45, 30 April 2001

5. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development to outline her policy on compensation for losses sustained by farmers and rural businesses as a result of foot-and-mouth disease.

(AQO 1322/00)

Photo of Ms Brid Rodgers Ms Brid Rodgers Social Democratic and Labour Party

Compensation is paid to owners of animals that have been affected by the disease, have been in contact with affected animals or have been exposed to the infection. It can also be paid for a limited range of materials — such as carcasses, fodder or feeding stock — that have been directly implicated as a disease risk. At the request of the Executive, the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister has set up an interdepartmental group to examine the economic impact of the foot-and-mouth crisis in Northern Ireland. This group, which will report to the Executive, is considering what practical measures might be feasible and appropriate to support those sectors affected by the foot-and-mouth outbreak, taking account of local circumstances.

Photo of David Ford David Ford Alliance

I thank the Minister for her response and her ongoing work in dealing with foot-and-mouth disease, but I specifically ask her to look in greater detail at the issue of consequential loss. Take, for example, the case of livestock marts. They are not closed because they have no customers but because of an edict issued by the Minister herself and subsequently backed by Brussels. Farm businesses, which have been encouraged to diversify by the Minister’s Department, are further examples. Their suffering is, in some senses, even worse than that of traditional farms on their own. If it is possible for the Scottish and Welsh Executives to take some action on consequential compensation, is it not also possible for it to happen here?

Photo of Ms Brid Rodgers Ms Brid Rodgers Social Democratic and Labour Party

I am aware — as, I am sure, are the Members — that consequential loss is a very difficult issue. Pinpointing the assistance necessary for the different sectors and areas is extremely difficult. GB and the Republic of Ireland are likewise facing a tough time in defining where any support might be given.

There is a hierarchy of need that has to be addressed. There are businesses, such as the marts, which have been totally closed down. There are businesses that have not been closed down but that have suffered greatly with a substantial loss of income. There are resource implications in any decision, and it would be a matter for the Department of Finance and Personnel to make an assessment and come to a view on what would be possible. That is why the Executive are looking at the issue of consequential loss.

I am very much aware of the issues raised by Mr Ford, particularly in the area of rural development, where people have been getting businesses off the ground. It is an extremely difficult area to deal with, and I can only say that the Executive are looking at several options. I will not go through them all now, but we have considered areas such as rates, small firm loan guarantees and revenue. I am sure that those were covered earlier by the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister.

Photo of Mr Oliver Gibson Mr Oliver Gibson DUP

My question fits somewhere into the "hierarchy of need" that the Minister mentioned. Does the Minister have any plans to give financial aid to farmers whose breeding stock has had to be slaughtered as a result of the ban on movement and sales?

Photo of Ms Brid Rodgers Ms Brid Rodgers Social Democratic and Labour Party

That question comes into the area of consequential loss. I recognise that this is an extremely difficult situation for farmers whose breeding stock has been slaughtered. My departmental advisers have been in touch with all the farmers whose stock has been culled and are advising them on how the situation should be tackled. In relation to consequential compensation, however, I am afraid that my answer has to remain the same as before, except to say that advice will be available to farmers on finance and on how to get their businesses up and going again.

Photo of Gerry McHugh Gerry McHugh Sinn Féin

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. In relation to consequential loss, farmers have so far taken severe losses, and they are now expected to pay vets for visits so that their livestock can be moved from their premises for grazing. I am unsure whether that is being paid for in Britain or whether farmers here are being asked to pay for that separately. It is a consequential cost, so I ask the Minister whether that can be taken into account and farmers given compensation for that loss.

Photo of Ms Brid Rodgers Ms Brid Rodgers Social Democratic and Labour Party

I am aware that the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (MAFF) has decided to shoulder some of the burden of the veterinary certification costs involved in issuing movement licences. This is not happening in relation to all licences, but I am seeking clarification on that matter. I will look urgently at providing a similar facility in Northern Ireland, but that has public expenditure implications, and I need to be sure that it is justified and affordable. This will take time, and in the meantime, farmers are responsible for paying for any veterinary certification that they require.

This is a difficult situation, not just for the farming community, but for many other sectors. There is a price tag and, unfortunately, we do not have a bottomless pit of money. I sympathise and understand that the situation is difficult for farmers. Allowing some movement was an easement for the farmers, but now I have the problem of paying for the licences.