← Back to Westminster Hall Debates
Bovine TB: Compensation
29 January 2020
Lead MP
Derek Thomas
St Ives
Con
Responding Minister
George Eustice
Tags
Agriculture & Rural Affairs
Word Count: 3734
Other Contributors: 5
At a Glance
Derek Thomas raised concerns about bovine tb: compensation in Westminster Hall. A government minister responded.
Key Requests to Government:
I am asking the Government to amend the compensation rules in the Cattle Compensation (England) Order 2019 to include cases where an animal is removed from the food chain due to evidence of bovine TB. This change would ensure that farmers receive fair compensation for their losses.
How the Debate Unfolded
MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said:
Lead Contributor
I am concerned about the current compensation scheme for bovine tuberculosis, which does not provide financial support to farmers when a carcass is condemned due to visible lesions suggesting TB presence. This issue affects local abattoirs and farmers who lose valuable assets without adequate compensation. In my constituency, Vivian Olds, a traditional family butcher with a small abattoir, faced significant financial loss after a cow was condemned based on the presence of lesions. The current scheme requires the farmer to pay for this loss, leading to unfair outcomes.
Alicia Kearns
Con
Rutland and Stamford
Ms Kearns highlighted the economic burden of bovine TB on farmers in her constituency, suggesting that DEFRA should consider a more accurate phage test developed by local farmers in partnership with the University of Nottingham to improve the compensation scheme.
Fay Jones
Con
Constituency Not Provided
Farmers in Wales are frustrated with the Welsh Government's lack of ambition and bravery compared to the UK Government. Pedigree animals, often part of a long-term genetic plan, deserve higher compensation than is currently offered. Fay Jones emphasized the importance of a fair compensation scheme for farmers affected by bovine TB. She highlighted that such changes could improve communication between the farming community and government agencies, fostering better collaboration in efforts to eradicate the disease.
Fiona Bruce
Con
Congleton
In her constituency, farmers receive inadequate assessment for compensation, particularly regarding the economic losses due to reduced milk yields and financial penalties from dairies when contracts are breached because of herd culling. Pointed out that farmers sometimes find table valuations do not represent the value of their animals accurately and suggested refining these tables to better reflect individual animal values.
Jim Shannon
DUP
Strangford
Mr Shannon expressed concern about the need for uniformity in the bovine TB compensation scheme across all parts of the United Kingdom, particularly ensuring that any legislative changes are discussed with the Northern Ireland Assembly and its Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs.
Martin Vickers
Con
Cleethorpes
In his intervention, Martin Vickers supported the need for a more equitable compensation scheme. He noted that the current system does not adequately address the financial burden faced by farmers when an animal is condemned due to suspected bovine TB.
Government Response
George Eustice
Government Response
Addressed concerns over bovine TB compensation, explaining the current system under the Animal Health Act 1981 and highlighting that DEFRA compensates only when compulsory slaughter is required. Noted recent progress in reducing TB incidence but acknowledged challenges with imperfect diagnostic tests. Discussed the use of table valuations versus individual valuations for determining compensation amounts and expressed willingness to meet specific stakeholders to discuss issues further.
▸
Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy
About Westminster Hall Debates
Westminster Hall debates are a chance for MPs to raise important issues affecting their constituents and get a response from a government minister. Unlike Prime Minister's Questions, these debates are more in-depth and collaborative. The MP who secured the debate speaks first, other MPs can contribute, and a minister responds with the government's position.