A review of the foot-and-mouth outbreak published this week has highlighted the urgent need to address the tensions between devolved administrations and the UK Government on animal health matters.
Launching his review, the report's author, Dr Iain Anderson, described the facilities at the Institute for Animal Health at Pirbright, Surrey as "shabby and dilapidated" and said there was a lack of clarity over who was responsible for managing it. He called for steps to be taken to ensure the failures in the structure and management at Pirbright are never allowed to happen again.
The report also sheds light on the tensions between different administrations in the UK. In particular, it echoes the views of the NFU Scotland union in calling for urgent action to address the failure in the current devolution settlement whereby the Scottish Government has control of animal health policy but not the funding of it, which remains reserved to Westminster.
A Scottish Government spokeswoman said: "We welcome the publication of this report and will consider the implications for Scotland carefully. The findings will support the work of the Scottish review into the foot-and-mouth outbreak last year. Our review, being undertaken by Jim Scudamore, will be published shortly and will help inform handling of any future animal health outbreaks."
She added: "We certainly need to bring the concordats and the nature of the relationship up to date. This must be a partnership of equals where the interests of Scotland and the other devolved nations are given due weight."
"Times have changed and there is much that could be improved in the way the relationship between the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) and the devolved administrations works, with the benefits felt by our farming industry and the rural economy as a whole."
NFUS president Jim McLaren said: "The current position where Scotland decides on animal health policy but has no control over its funding is an anomaly of the Scotland Act. It inevitably causes tensions north and south of the border and, frankly, that is the last thing we need when we're facing a disease crisis."
"This is not just about handling disease outbreaks, it is about the day-to-day protection of animal health in Scotland. With Defra now facing a major budgetary squeeze from the Treasury, there is a very real likelihood that the priorities that industry and Government in Scotland have developed together will fall by the wayside because London won't pay for them.
"We need the animal health budget devolved to Scotland as a matter of urgency, something the Prime Minister said he is open to looking at."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article