Hard border between Wales and England to halt deadly disease could be 'costly and futile'
Livestock farmers in Wales face hard border arrangements with England in what some believe is a futile attempt to halt the advance of a deadly disease. The industry fears being crippled by the need to test and licence vast numbers of sheep and cattle when they cross the border into England.
Unlike England, Wales is still free of bluetongue, a viral disease that cause ulcers around the animal's mouth and face. In the Netherlands, tens of thousands of sheep have died and British farmers fear worse could happen in the UK.
In an attempt to contain the virus' spread, an England-wide restricted zone (RZ) is to be imposed from July 1. In practice this means existing movement controls will be eased with farmer encouraged to use new bluetongue vaccines instead.
The Welsh Government is reluctant to follow suit, fearing a freedom-of-movement regime will hasten bluetongue's spread into the country. Instead, Cardiff wants to keep the virus at bay 'for as long as we can' and so has opted not to apply an RZ in the county.
But the Welsh farming sector has warned the implications could be 'catastrophic' for cross-border trade. Some 550 cross-border agri businesses and straddle the Wales-England border and each year tens of thousands of animals are shipped out to livestock markets.
It also has major implications for July's Royal Welsh Show, Europe's largest agri showcase and the biggest annual event in Wales. Livestock exhibitors from England and Scotland will now be unable to attend, slashing the cattle entry by 40%. Refunds are being processed.
Urging Cardiff to align Wales with England, the industry has branded the looming arrangements as both 'a futile endeavour and wholly impractical'. FUW president Ian Rickman said farmers' first instincts were to keep any disease out of Wales – but in this case the solution could be economically disastrous.
Mr Rickman said midges carrying the disease are likely to blow into Wales regardless of England's RZ. He said the insects 'do not respect any such boundaries' and the RZ will hasten the spread of bluetongue to Wales anyway. 'The on-farm practicalities involved with adhering to this policy position brings with it a wealth of barriers and complications,' he said.
'The mechanics of issuing licences in a timely manner, arranging and conducting pre-movement sampling and testing, co-ordinating haulage and the extortionate costs and disruption to cross-border holdings and trade – it is feared that the decision to hold back the tide will be entirely unattainable and impractical.'
While Bluetongue serotype 3 (BTV-3) poses a serious threat to cattle, sheep, goats deer and alpacas across the UK, it does not affect humans or compromise food safety.
Deputy First Minister Huw Irranca-Davies said he had agonised over the decision. On balance, it was the lesser of two evils, he said, adding: 'I cannot in all conscience invite Bluetongue into Wales on 1st July through aligning with the RZ in England.
'I am unwilling to risk the uncertain impact of the disease in livestock dense areas like the Welsh borders. I am also extremely concerned about the economic and farmer wellbeing impacts of dealing with sick animals, and the livestock productivity and fertility losses associated with severe Bluetongue, as observed in many affected European countries.'
By setting up border arrangements, it's hoped this will buy time for Welsh farmers to vaccinate their animals against the disease. If Bluetongue does arrive in Wales anyway, disease controls will be implemented. Being a fast-changing situation, Mr Irranca-Davies pledged to 'adapt to the evolving disease situation'.
NFU Cymru president Aled Jones said Welsh farmers were 'extremely worried' about the disease - but also about the containment and testing strategy.
He said: 'We have significant concerns about the lack of resources and testing capacity within the laboratories and APHA (Animal and Plant Health Agency) given the significant amount of stock that move across the border from England to Wales for management, welfare and trading purposes.
'We understand that going forward the costs of testing will be borne by the farmer, which will cause a huge increase to the cost of trading. Sign up for the North Wales Live newsletter sent twice daily to your inbox
'We are about to enter an extremely important time of the year in the farming calendar, with many farmers looking to trade breeding stock and store stock ahead of the autumn and winter months.
'For many herds and flocks, the opportunity to trade breeding stock, both those looking to purchase or sell stock, only comes once a year and this trade is critical. Welsh Government must ensure that a sustainable solution is found as soon as possible.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Spectator
34 minutes ago
- Spectator
The post-Brexit Gibraltar deal is going down badly in Spain
Conservative and Reform politicians have denounced this week's post-Brexit Gibraltar deal as a betrayal. 'Gibraltar is British, and given Labour's record of surrendering our territory and paying for the privilege, we will be reviewing carefully all the details of any agreement that is reached,' Dame Priti Patel, the shadow foreign secretary, said. Meanwhile, describing Labour as 'the worst negotiators in history', Nigel Farage called the agreement 'yet another surrender'. But Spain's right-wing parties have, if possible, been even more damning. José Manuel García-Margallo, a former Minister of Foreign Affairs, described the agreement as 'total surrender', the 'absolute renunciation' of Spain's political and economic sovereignty over the Rock. 'All the British companies that want to settle in the EU post-Brexit will now go to Gibraltar,' he predicted, asking rhetorically who will now invest in Spain's neighbouring territory. He dismissed the argument that the pact helps the approximately 15,000 people living in Spain who work in Gibraltar, insisting that Spain, 'the fourth largest economy in the euro should be able to provide a solution for that number of people'.
Glasgow Times
an hour ago
- Glasgow Times
'Our homelessness services are under significant pressure'
We are aware that the number of people living in temporary homeless accommodation is at a record high, from reports provided by Glasgow's Health and Social Care Partnership. Currently, staff at the Health and Social Care Partnership are focusing on supporting people who are living in an emergency situation. At the moment, the demand for housing in Glasgow is much greater than the housing supply. There can be a delay of several years before people who are homeless can access a permanent house or flat. Homeless charities highlight that the cuts by the UK Department for Work and Pensions towards Personal Independence Payment and Universal Credit will lead to a further increase in homelessness. Decisions by the UK Government in the year ahead are likely to exacerbate our already stretched council services. The Scottish Government is mitigating the UK Government's Bedroom Tax. We know that this funding would be better spent tackling the housing crisis and the UK Government should scrap this tax. There is a Housing Transfer Incentive Scheme in Glasgow which can help release large housing association homes by encouraging people in 'under-occupied' properties with three rooms or more, to downsize. Tenants can access appropriately sized homes to meet their needs through specific housing support services. We can welcome the Scottish Parliament's Housing Inquiry by the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee which has published a series of recommendations to support further collaboration by the Scottish Government with housing providers to deliver a national overarching Housing Emergency Action Plan by the end of this session. We need the Scottish Government to provide clarity on whether its additional funding for the Affordable Housing Supply Programme budget will ensure that it meets its target of providing 110,000 affordable homes by 2030. It is vital that housing is a priority and that the Scottish Government considers the importance of increasing the Affordable Housing Supply Programme budget. There has been significant partnership working undertaken to respond to the housing crisis. We can welcome the number of housing associations providing lets to tenants who are homeless across Glasgow. The Scottish Government can explore the opportunities available by increasing social investment in housing. The capacity of housing associations could be developed to increase the number of homes, especially for families, in our local communities. There is a need to ensure clarity for housing providers on the intended statutory requirement for homes to meet net-zero standards. Uncertainty is deterring housing development and this needs to be addressed to help tackle the housing crisis. We can support the appointment of Màiri McAllan as Cabinet Secretary for Housing to ensure that there is increased focus on tackling the housing crisis and providing energy-efficient homes for the future. It is vital that the new Cabinet Secretary can use all the powers at her disposal to address the housing crisis we face.
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Starmer and Reeves are back from the brink – here's what they must do next
Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves admitted mistakes had been made during the government's difficult first year when she addressed a private meeting of the parliamentary Labour Party (PLP) after announcing her spending review. Her audience knew what she meant: her catastrophic decision on the pensioners' winter fuel allowance. Reeves was more honest in private than she is in public. Even after their spectacular U-turn, she and Keir Starmer insist last July's decision was right at the time. In her defence, the chancellor said Labour had been out of power for 14 years and in office for one – an admission, perhaps, that ministers must learn on the job. She won a good reception at the PLP for her £113bn boost to investment projects and her framing of her review, first made in The Independent, as 'Labour's choices'. But Reeves' plea for Labour MPs to 'get out and sell' the spending programme in their constituencies landed badly with some in her audience. On Westminster's summer party circuit, they grumbled about a lack of salesmanship from both Reeves and Keir Starmer. These critics have a point. Neither the prime minister nor the chancellor is a natural storyteller. They sometimes look like technocratic automatons as they prioritise the 'stability' they offered after Conservative chaos over their election-winning pitch of 'change'. Although the social democrat Reeves is more ideological than the arch-pragmatist Starmer, many Labour backbenchers complain she has become a prisoner of 'Treasury orthodoxy'. The double act of PM and chancellor works better when they complement each other. Tony Blair was a good communicator and Gordon Brown the brains behind New Labour's strategy and domestic policy. The relationship between David Cameron and George Osborne was similar, and without the corrosive personal tensions between Blair and Brown. Crucially, Blair and Cameron had a story to tell. Today, even some Starmer allies admit privately he has yet to articulate a coherent narrative about his and his government's purpose. However, ministers and Labour backbenchers sense the spending review marks the overdue start of such a process. They detect an important shift – from a technocratic approach towards Labour's traditional goal of social justice: the winter fuel U-turn, an extension of free school meals and a £39bn boost for affordable housing. The biggest symbol of this change of tack will be measures to combat child poverty in the autumn, likely to include lifting the two-child benefit cap. That would be a break with the opinion poll-driven approach of Morgan McSweeney, Starmer's chief of staff. Although the cap is supported by the public, sometimes politicians have to lead public opinion rather than merely follow it. Aides insist Starmer's pragmatism is an asset that gives him the flexibility to try different approaches if Plan A doesn't work and to correct mistakes. But the absence of an ideological anchor can be a liability. To see off the real threat from Nigel Farage, Labour will need more than attacks on Reform UK; it will require a positive vision based on Labour values to woo centre-left voters. A crusade against child poverty will unite the Labour Party, while welfare cuts divide it. Soft-left ministers have a spring in their step: 'Things are moving in the right direction,' one told me. Indeed, the spending review was not dictated by 'Treasury orthodoxy' and the short-termism which often results in cutting investment projects to balance the books. Reeves addressed at least some of the long-term challenges facing the country. Labour's poor results in last month's local elections in England encouraged the rethink. They proved that caution isn't working. What is needed now is not old Labour but bold Labour. That will require more boldness and honesty on taxation. It's an open secret that, barring an economic miracle, Reeves will have to raise taxes in her autumn Budget. Significantly, she is not ruling it out, reverting to the formula Labour used before last year's election: there's nothing here (in the manifesto/spending review) requiring higher taxes. It's the politicians' old, disingenuous friend of 'no plans" used before Reeves raised taxes by £40bn in her first Budget. Starmer and Reeves should prepare the ground now by making the case for higher taxes to deliver better public services and the higher defence spending needed in the dangerous new world of Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin. If they don't, the vacuum will be filled by months of damaging headlines predicting which taxes Reeves will raise – many of which will turn out to be wrong. If Starmer and Reeves don't make the case, a right-dominated press will blame the inevitable tax rises on Labour economic mismanagement. There is another story to tell. Although the public tend to prioritise avoiding tax increases over investing in public services, Labour can win the argument by exposing the fantasy economics of Reform and Tory plans to cut taxes and raise spending. Brown won such an argument when he raised national insurance to fund the NHS in 2002. Reeves' fiscal rules can provide the 'stability' and tax rises the 'change.' Labour must deliver both. Ministers need to start the debate on tax and spending that the country should have had before last year's election. Now.
