This contribution comes unmistakeably from Bryn:

Whilst we listen to the broken record of Blair saying "vaccination is an
option", the Argentinean's are on the verge of selling us VACCINATED meat in
a month or so !

If you don't believe me, ask their Agriculture Secretary Marcelo Regunaga.
Their export market collapsed in March (as did ours) when they got hit with
FMD.  Unlike the UK they took the wise route, and vaccinated 98% of their 50
million cattle - a heck of a sight cheaper than the cost of slaughter,
compensation, burial pits and stinking funeral pyres; not to mention the
domino effect of the tourist trade and rural economies.

Presently Argentina is coping with about 1200 FMD outbreaks, a lot less than
the UK's 1941 (as I write). They expect to resume their export trade
sometime next month, whilst we grope around in a senseless never ending
slaughter only policy that is costing us tens of BILLIONS.

Maybe Blair should pop back over and take some lessons, and drag Morley the
Ignorant with him, along with Beckett Three Inquiries. Don't mention the



This short message was forwarded to us by Betty in Holland:

from a Shetland breeder:

I heard this morning's talk on R4 as well. Summed it up very precisely.
Biosecurity at farms: just met a farmer's wife from our village (fortunately
from the other end), and she said they have NEVER  done anything about
disinfection. They think there's no point worrying, and if it happens, it
happens. Obviously they are in the majority! And of course by now no-one
else around here is doing any disinfecting of any kind, except me.
They also have not watched the DEFRA video which they have just received.
Very timely distribution, only approx 6 months late. As for that, I have
actually not received mine yet. How about everyone else?

And also from the same source:

Saturday Essay - Frederick Forsyth. Radio 4 -
Sat 11th August 8.55 am

Foot and Mouth Disease.
I haven't touched on it yet but now seems time enough. There are five brief
that one might reasonably make.

First - The incompetence, the sheer blithering, wall-to-wall, start to
finish (except
that it's not over yet by a mile) incompetence of government and civil
service at
every single level. Flick back through six months of reports and you cannot
that highly paid bureaucrats could be so unbelieveably stupid. With the sole
exception of the brief intervention of the army, it has been an unbroken
litany of
mal-administration that, in the legal world, would have offered indictments
criminal negligence.

Second - The cost to us all, now being spin-doctored downwards. In truth
already #3 billion from tax payers pockets alone. But that's the tip of the
Add the tens of thousands of guest houses, hotels, visitor attractions,
theme parks
that will never see a visitor this summer. Fold in the rented diggers,
dumpsters, bulldozers and army staff. Add to that the thousands of salaries
vets and slaughtermen on the payroll for twelve months instead of three. Add
dues of hundreds of millions of lost incomes for this year, next year and
the one
after. You're looking at a loss to our economy of about 10 billion quid!

And still the piontless, mindless mass slaughter goes on. And you know why?
Because otherwise the government, its mandarins and pseudo-scientists might
have to admit that they had got it wrong!

So what did they get wrong? Well the alternative - vaccination. Modern
vaccines are
so cheap, powerful and side-effect free that they can stop this disease in
its tracks
by creating fire-breaks around every outbreak. Not of festering corpses but
immune animals through which the virus cannot move.

The Dutch, who imported it from us, wiped it out months ago. The two leading
epidemioligists in the world, the Britisher, Fred Brown who is so good the
snapped him up years ago and he now works for them, and the Dutchman, Simon
Barteling, have pleaded with our government to listen to them. Both flew
here at
their own expense to explain how to conquer the disease with minimum damage.
Both were insultingly disregarded.

The whine is that if we vaccinate we lose our meat export markets worth
#500 million a year. Wrong! For one thing the offspring of vaccinated cows,
and sows are Simon Pure and they take a year to breed. And how many times
does #500 million go into #10 billion? Twenty years - that's what! Any way
import 500 millions quid of meat every year, some of it cheap stuff from
with endemic disease. Why don't we just eat our own meat at an affordable

Point Four - The Lies. First it was spin doctored that FMD got here via a
rogue truck
driver. Wrong! It came from either Asia or Africa, probabaly with government
licence. Then it was Asian airlines, then Chinese take-aways. All lies! Now
its the
farmers, again, deliberately poisoning their own lifes work. More lies,
directed by
job-for-life little weasels in high places - and a community experiencing
suicides a week!

Let's get the facts right. It was the government that devised the
scheme, not the farmers! It was the government that appointed the valuers,
not the

Finally - The Cover Up. When new labour came to power, almost the first
thing it
did was to institute an independent enquiry into the BSE cock-up.Quite
the report excoriated the Tory ministers responsible for incompetence and
attempted white wash. Now we are told it would be impossible to have an
(into what was far more preventable given that BSE was totally new and
new where it came from or what it was. While FMD is short lived and
well known) because, and I quote, "There would not be the time available".
lies and more lies!

I take no pleasure in saying this but we have some seriously unpleasant
running this country!


From the Sunday Telegraph:

Cull farmers better off, says Haskins
By Martin Bentham
(Filed: 12/08/2001)
FARMERS whose animals have been culled are better off than those who escaped
foot and mouth disease, according to the man Tony Blair appointed to revive
infected by the outbreak.
In an interview with The Sunday Telegraph, Lord Haskins, the Labour peer who
was named as the Government's "rural recovery co-ordinator" last week, said
"in a black sort of way" farms could benefit economically from the disease.
He said that farmers who had lost their stock had suffered "more emotionally
financially", whereas their neighbours had seen their businesses suffer
of government restrictions but had not received compensation.
"The people who have economically come out of it best have been the farmers
who have had foot and mouth," he said. "They have got payments. They have
their assets, but they have got the interest on the money until they
"The people who have been most affected are farmers in the restricted areas
haven't had foot and mouth and who can't move their stock. You could in a
sort of way say that the best thing for farmers in those areas is to have
foot and
mouth disease economically, rather than being shut up indefinitely."
Lord Haskins said there was "lots of speculation" that farmers had
recognised this
and acted accordingly. Asked if he thought this had happened, he replied:
"You say
that, I can't."
He then gave further provocation to those who believe that the Government is
out of
touch with the countryside by giving a blunt response to a question about
suffering of farmers whose livestock had been culled.
"I think it is more emotional than economic. One of the things I shall be
to find out is how many of them are going to restock, as opposed to selling
"There is evidence that there are too many sheep around. They may get out. I
wouldn't be surprised if some of them are thinking about that."
Lord Haskins's remarks will fuel the row over Government briefing against
farming community, which began last week when claims of multi-million pound
compensation payments were given to the press.
Farming leaders have accused ministers of seeking to distract attention from
Government's failure to control the disease by seeking to smear farmers with
stories of profiteering and fraud.
Lord Haskins did little to dampen the controversy, however, by adopting a
tone as he outlined his views on foot and mouth and the future of rural
Although he said that he regarded himself as "a countryman", pointing out
that he
lived on a farm in East Yorkshire, he stressed that he had little time for
those with
an overly romantic view of rural life. Among those were the Prince of Wales.
Having described the Prince's views on agriculture as being "for the birds"
month, Lord Haskins was more circumspect, but remained critical.
"He's very concerned about the problems in the countryside. I understand
that, but I
think sometimes that there's a suggestion that we should return to some
fantasy of the old days, when things were better 50 years ago.
"I do not believe that. I was brought up in the countryside 50 years ago.
people then who worked in the countryside were very badly paid. Now although
there are a lot fewer people in the countryside they are much better off
than they
were. Sometimes there's some over-the-top stuff talked about the good old
days in
the countryside."
Lord Haskins, who is also the chairman of Northern Foods, will be charged
reviving the economy of Cumbria, one of the areas worst affected by the
He indicated, however, that he would be under pressure from Whitehall not to
recommend further pay-outs to those affected by the outbreak.
"The trouble is people think I am going to come here with a lot of money,
but there
are people in the Treasury who say quite a lot of money has gone into this
and I think some of them are quite right."
He added: "I think that the political classes in London would think that the
have been getting a lot out of the system and would be less sympathetic than
On the future of the rural economy, Lord Haskins said there would need to be
greater diversification, with more part-time farming and a greater role for
and light industry.
He described himself as an "agnostic" on hunting, the abolition of which is
expected to be debated by Parliament before the election.
Lord Haskins concluded with a note of optimism, expressing his belief that
countryside could recover, albeit in altered form.
"Farming comes and goes, it is going through a bad patch, accelerated by
foot and
mouth and BSE. It will come through, but only if farmers accept change."


 Christopher Bookers Notebook from the Sunday Telegraph, posted on the
warmwell website:


LORD HASKINS, the Irish multi-millionaire appointed by his friend Mr Blair
as "rural affairs co-ordinator", to draw up a long-term plan for the future
of British agriculture, began by betraying astonishing naivete about his new
role, in at least two respects. Farmers may protest that inviting one of our
leading supermarket suppliers, as chairman of Northern Foods and Express
Dairies, to advise on the future of small farms is rather like "putting a
fox in charge of the henhouse". But just as worrying have been the bizarre
technical blunders already perpetrated by the man who, only last month, was
cheerfully telling a conference organised by the Royal Society for the
Protection of Birds that half of Britain's farmers would be out of business
within 10 years.

 Lord Haskins's first howler was his warning that farmers could not in
future expect compensation for animals slaughtered by the Government in foot
and mouth epidemics, and that it was up to them to insure against such
losses. Not untypically of a fanatical Europhile, this showed remarkable
ignorance of EU law.  Compensation in such cases is not decided by the
British Government but is laid down by Council Decision 90/424. There is no
way other EU countries would agree to repeal this law (although it has been
wrongly claimed that Brussels will foot 60 per cent of the foot and mouth
compensation bill when, under the arcane rules of our EU budget rebate,
British taxpayers will in fact end up paying 83 per cent).  What Lord
Haskins should also have established, before shooting from the hip in this
way, is that insurance against foot and mouth is a complete non-starter,
since so much of any potential loss is out of farmers' hands. Under EU law
we are compelled to import food from countries with the disease. Ninety per
cent of the animals slaughtered are healthy and only killed on Government
orders. And, under both EU law and UK Government diktat, they are not free
to minimise their losses by protecting their animals with vaccination.

 Lord Haskins's second howler came when, after talking about how British
farmers were "mollycoddled" by subsidies, he was interviewed on the Today
programme while holidaying in France. He waxed lyrical about how French
rural communities "appear to be more affluent than their equivalents in
Britain", obviously without any idea that the chief reason for this is that
the French government uses Brussels subsidies and its own tax laws to
"mollycoddle" French farmers in a way their British counterparts can only
dream of. The same goes for the farmers of Lord Haskins's native Ireland.
British ministers like to boast, for instance, about the #1.6 billion "they"
are spending on farm subsidies under the rural development fund, without
ever letting on that this is a Brussels scheme covering seven years, under
which Britain claims #230 million a year while, on behalf of those
"affluent" French farmers Lord Haskins is so keen on, their own government
is claiming #8.4 billion, or #1.2 billion a year. Even the Irish government,
for which Lord Haskin also works under one of his many hats, claims #3.5
billion, or #500 million a year, twice the amount claimed by the UK,
although its farming industry is only a quarter the size of Britain's.

The truth is that, far from being "mollycoddled", British farmers are forced
to compete with their main EU rivals in the famous single market, on a
playing field about as unlevel as the north face of Everest. Their greatest
enemy is not so much the Common Agricultural Policy as their own Government,
which deluges them with a unique overload of regulations and then ensures
they receive less financial support than any other farmers in the EU. As he
is a generous supporter of the Labour Party, it is highly unlikely we will
hear any of this from Lord Haskins. Certainly appointing this outspoken
champion of "big is beautiful" to look after the future of Britain's small
farmers can be compared to putting a shark in charge of a tank of goldfish.
But at least in future the great man might like to check his facts before
getting his foot confused with his mouth. Aug 12


From the CullMaff website:

- Carlisle, Wednesday 15 August 2001.  Ben "no vaccination" Gill will be
making one of his rare visits to Cumbria.  He is due to address an open
meeting of farmers at the Shepard's Inn, Rosehill at 7.30pm.  Why not pop
along and tell him what you think of his pivotal role in this ongoing
carnage?  We feel sure that he will be delighted to meet his detractors and
discuss the matter calmly & sensibly - after all, the NFU is such a
democratically sensitive body.....

- Sedburgh Heart of Cumbria Meeting, Thursday 16 August 2001.  Peoples Hall,
Sedburgh, 7pm.  Dr Ruth Watkins will address the urgent need for
VACCINATION.  Sedburgh is likely to be the next killing ground as DEFRA
begin testing the hefted flocks on the Howgills.  All welcome.


And a final reminder about the open meeting with Anthony Gibson at Shebbear
village hall on Monday 13th August (tomorrow) at 2 pm.

All for tonight

from Alan & Rosie