Back to website

Notes from Mr Persey

The 14 page document ( the last page was originally passed to the press) has now gone to the WMN and Farmers Weekly and has the title 'My involvement with the Waughs'.

Mrs Beckett was reported to have said in the House on Thursday 'I think it would be wholly wrong and very unfair to Mr Dring to suggest that in some way he is responsible. He is not responsible'.

Mr Dring inspected Burnside Farm on January 24 2001. He said in his signed statement 'I inspected this premises with a view to renewing the Waughs Article 26 licence'. This was the annual inspection for 'The Holding Premises Licence' under The Animal By-Products Order 1999.

The ABPO 1999 revoked the Diseases of Animals (Waste Food ) order 1973, however the same strict operators guidelines were maintained.

'The standard specification for holding premises' as defined in the DISEASES OF ANIMALS (WASTE FOOD) ORDER 1973 were as follows:-

There are 8 more conditions listed including the right of revoking the licence at any time in the event of the licensee failing one or more of the conditions.

Did the Waughs fail to comply with any of the conditions of their 'Holding Premises Licence'???

Statements appearing in the DEFRA document 'Origin of the Uk Foot and Mouth Disease Epidemic in 2001' give a hint of conditions at Burnside Farm.

We are also told (page 19) There were 2 dogs... rats were present. No control other than the presence of two dogs on the premises.

Mrs Beckett must wake up to the fact that Jim Dring failed to fulfill his regulatory responsibilities under the Animal By Products Order 1999 and she and DEFRA must carry the can. She only deludes herself by saying 'He (Jim Dring) is not responsible'.

I would suggest that the way forward is the reconvening of the Anderson Inquiry and it should be held in public, like Hutton.