UK government slaughter policy ‘illegal’
As movement restrictions imposed during the foot-and-mouth epidemic were lifted last week on almost 8,500 farms in the North of England, it emerged that the UK government had acted illegally during the crisis by implementing its ‘Contiguous Cull’ scheme.
Under the scheme, which stipulated that all animals on farms within three kilometres of an infected premises should be slaughtered, over three million healthy animals were killed. However, it now appears the scheme directly contravened two major pieces of legislation, both of which were designed to protect the interests of animals and their owners. The first was the UK government’s own Animal Health Act of 1981, which states that officials can kill animals only where there is proof that they are diseased or have been exposed to infection. The second was EU directive 85/511 which rules that animals can be culled only when already infected. Though the illegality of the government’s actions were underlined in a High Court test case in June, when Mr Justice Harrison ruled that the ministry had no power to implement a blanket slaughter policy, this did not prevent its officials from pushing on with the cull – to the considerable distress of many livestock owners.
The controversy surrounding the issue was fuelled last month by Elliot Morley, the minister in charge of the government’s Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), who claimed it was ‘a fact’ that attempts to challenge the legality of the cull had helped prolong the epidemic. The minister was responding to criticism relating to the government’s forthcoming Animal Health Bill, which broadly grants Defra officials the same powers they exercised (illegally) during the foot and mouth crisis, and will give them the right to enter any premises, to kill any animal they wish, regardless of the animal owner’s rights under the UK Human Rights Act.
