Oral question asked in the House of Commons, by David Heathcoat-Amory (Conservative). It was answered on Thursday, 4 February 2010 on behalf of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.
Bovine Tuberculosis
- Question
- Does it make sense to cull infected cattle but to leave the infection in the wildlife in the relevant areas, so that reinfection happens? Is that not bad for wildlife, bad for farmers and bad for the taxpayer?
- Answer
-
The right hon. Gentleman will know about the badger culling trials that were carried out—originally the Krebs trials—and the report of the independent scientific group. As I recall, 11,000 badgers were culled and hon. Members are well aware of the ISG's conclusion. I agree with the right hon. Gentleman that we have to find the most effective means of dealing with the terrible disease, which is having a huge impact, including on farmers in his constituency. This summer, we can look forward, subject to the Veterinary Medicines Directorate's granting the final licensing, to the start of the six badger vaccination deployment projects. Many farmers will participate in those, and that offers a way forward. I am grateful for the support for that.
Secondary information
- Type
- Oral question
- Reference
- 505 c435
- Session
- 2009-10
- Oral question type
- 1st Supplementary
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Disease control Bovine tuberculosis
- Link
- View this Oral question on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-01 15:08:23 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/Hansard/PARLIAMENTARY_QUESTION_1493532/-question
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/Hansard/PARLIAMENTARY_QUESTION_1493532/-question
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/Hansard/PARLIAMENTARY_QUESTION_1493532/-question