UK Parliament / Open data

Fallen Stock (Isle of Wight)

Proceeding contribution from Dan Norris (Labour) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 23 June 2009. It occurred during Adjournment debate on Fallen Stock (Isle of Wight).
I congratulate the hon. Member for Isle of Wight (Mr. Turner) on securing this debate on an important health issue. I thank him for his clear and concise explanation of the problems, and for meeting the challenge of reading out some difficult words, which I hopefully will avoid myself. In recognition of the recent court judgment stating that burial on the Isle of Wight is illegal, the Government have in fact moved quickly to amend domestic legislation to legalise burial on the island so that farmers can continue to have the viable route of burial to dispose of their fallen stock. This is not just an opinion coming from me or my officials; it comes from the NFU. I have an e-mail from Richard Macdonald, the director general, who thanks one of my officials and the team—John Bourne, et al—for their speedy and excellent help in getting the Isle of Wight animal burial situation resolved so quickly. He said that it was much appreciated and needed, and that he would be grateful if thanks would go to all concerned. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will recognise that some good work has been done by DEFRA and others to try to find a solution to this challenging problem. The Government have formalised the pragmatic arrangements that have been in place for the past four years—I recognise completely the description that the hon. Gentleman has given and doubtless it has been a challenging situation. Those pragmatic arrangements are intended to ease the burden on the industry caused by a lack of approved disposal outlets on the island. They were put in place with the full agreement of all parties concerned including, obviously, the Government, and the Isle of Wight council and the industry. As required by EU law, DEFRA has notified the EU Commission of its decision to designate the Isle of Wight as a remote area in order to permit burial. To date, no negative response has been received from the Commission. I do not accept the hon. Gentleman's point that it is inappropriate to designate the Isle of Wight as a remote area. A case could be made by comparing it with more remote places, but most people living on the mainland would think the Isle of Wight is pretty remote. Some of my family lived there, so I know from experience that it is not unknown for ferries and other forms of transport to be delayed or postponed, sometimes for days in extremis. The case that DEFRA has made that the island is remote stands up to factual scrutiny, and we may have to disagree about it. The amendment to domestic legislation will remain under review and DEFRA will continue to work closely with the local authority, the Environment Agency, the Rural Development Commission, farming unions and local collectors to ensure a longer-term solution—other than burial—for disposal of fallen stock on the island. To that end, the Isle of Wight Economic Partnership has invited proposals for disposal of fallen stock on the island, as the hon. Gentleman will know, which include the possibility of an on-island incinerator. It recently made an assessment of expressions of interest. DEFRA officials are being consulted on the process and will do all that they can to ensure that the process has a positive outcome. I made a note of the other suggestions that the hon. Gentleman made, because a good pot of possible solutions is welcome as we move through the process. The Government agree that the current arrangements, while providing means for farmers to dispose of their fallen stock in the short term, do not provide a satisfactory long-term solution. That is why we are working closely with all interested parties on the island to find a commercially viable, more permanent solution for disposing of fallen stock safely and without risk to the environment. Any support the hon. Gentleman can provide to the efforts of the Isle of Wight council, the NFU, DEFRA and others to find viable proposals will be greatly appreciated by all the organisations involved and, doubtless, by his farming constituents, who I am sure are keen for the matter to be rectified as soon as possible. On a point of fact, I should like to mention the Brownrigg case. On 10 November 2007, at around 10.30 am, Mrs. Stephanie Moul was riding a horse when she saw five dead sheep in a field farmed by the Brownriggs. Further down the track, she saw more remains, including a jaw and leg bone with fleece attached. Two minutes or so later, she saw two more decaying sheep carcases. Between 12 and 16 November 2005, Isle of Wight council trading standards officers visited the Brownrigg's farm and observed similar things in different quantities in different locations. They observed skulls, sheep spines and ribcages, carcasses at varying stages of decay, a sheep's leg protruding from a patch of maggots on a muck heap, and miscellaneous sheep bones and skeletons. On 22 April this year, a court judgment dismissed a case taken by the Isle of Wight local authority to prosecute the Brownriggs for failure to dispose of fallen stock in accordance with the Animal By-Products Regulations 2005—the hon. Gentleman referred to this case, which of course involved his constituents. The judge ruled that as the state, DEFRA and the Isle of Wight council had failed to""ensure that adequate arrangements exist to guarantee the collection and transportation of fallen stock"," as stated in article 7(3) of the EU animal by-products regulation, it was an abuse of process to prosecute Mr. and Mrs. Brownrigg under the domestic regulations. The judge dismissed the case and ruled that burial under a pragmatic arrangement put in place by DEFRA with council and industry agreement was illegal. In response to the judgment, DEFRA amended domestic legislation with effect from 2 May 2009 formally to designate the island as a remote area, thereby legalising burial and giving clarity both to enforcers and to farmers. DEFRA stresses that the derogation to allow burial should be considered an interim measure only, and work continues on developing a longer-term solution to disposal. I could not agree more with the hon. Gentleman on the need for the matter not to drag on and for a solution to be found as soon as possible. To that end, I have decided to visit the Isle of Wight to meet interested parties so that we can work together to find a medium and longer-term solution to the lack of fallen stock disposal outlets on the island. Without having to ask, I know that the hon. Gentleman will want to play an important role in that. I look forward to meeting him and his constituents shortly, with a view to finding a pragmatic solution as quickly as possible. Sitting suspended.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
494 c228-30WH 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
Westminster Hall
Back to top