Committee Reports::Report - Review of Public Expenditure for the Eradication of Bovine Tuberculosis::01 January, 1986::Appendix

APPENDIX IV

I.C.O.S. OBSERVATIONS IN REGARD TO THE ORGANISATION AND FINANCING OF THE T.B. ERADICATION PROGRAMME:

Background

In 1985 herdowners contributed a record £13.70 million approximately to disease earadication, in the form of the Bovine Diseases Levy introduced on January 1st 1984, and doubled in November 1984. The corresponding figure collected for 1984 came to £5.872 million.


This very substantial contribution by herdowners to disease eradication in 1985 enabled the Department of Agriculture to carry out a full round of herd testing, as provided for in Building on Reality.


The Government Programme also provided that the new rate of Bovine Diseases Levy would only run to the end of 1985. Despite this earlier undertaking, the Government decided in December 1985 that the higher rate of levy would continue for 1986. At the same time the Government Public Estimates provided for a cutback of £3.5 million (i.e. form £22.5 m. to £19.00 m.) in the State provisions for T.B. eradication in 1966. This decision by Government effectively brought T.B. herd testing back to 1984 levels (i.e. 60% of National Herd).


This type of stop - go - stop approach to the T.B. Eradication Programme at a time when herdowners are contributing up to £14.00 million per annum, apart from the cost of private pre-movement testing estimated at a further £4 - £6 million per annum, is very difficult to comprehend.


In addition, the Comprehensive Public Expenditure figures for Animal Diseases Eradication published in January 1984 showed an estimated Administration figure of £8.750 million for 1983. However, when the actual figures for 1983 (Outturn) were published in 1985, the Administration figure for 198had increased from the estimated £8.750 million to £13.658 million (i.e. discrepancy of £4.908 million). In the meantime, the Bovine Diseases had been doubled in November 1984.


At the same time, published staffing levels of the Department of Agriculture in Disease Eradication were adjusted as follows:


 

ESTIMATED

OUTTURN

Administration

586

623

Vets

186

196

A.O.’s

282

287

Other

-

226

TOTAL

1,054

1,332

TOTAL DISCREPANCY -

278

I.C.O.S. POLICY ON T.B. ERADICATION PROGRAMME FUNDING


The only logical approach to T.B. Eradication is to adopt the recommendations of the Department of Agriculture’s Animal Health Council, made by the Council in its review of the T.B. Scheme in August of 1984.


Package of New Testing Measures:


1.Abolition of Bovine Diseases Levy.


2.The phasing out of the 30 Day pre-Movement Test for internal movement.


3.Introduction of a 3 Year Programme of two herd tests in the first 15 months (i.e. November 1st 1984 to January 31st 1986), followed by four herd tests over a 2 year period. The Department of Agriculture to pay for the first test; the herdowner to pay for the second test.


4.Targets set; to be achieved at the end of the 3 Year Programme.


The obvious advantages of this approach to financing T.B. Eradiction are as follows:-


1.Herdowners contribute, and and in proportion to testing carried


2.Herdowners would demand better quality testing and better service from Department of Agriculture D.V.O.’s.


3.Greater accountability, and more active involvement in the scheme by herdowners.


In the present situation, particularly with the cutbacks introduced in the current year, individual herdowner contributions to the Bovine Diseases Levy can bear little, or no, relationship to benefit from the Scheme:


e.g.County Donegal.


In 1986 a total of 11,862 herdowners in Co. Donegal will contribute an estimated £400,000 / £450,000 to the Bovine Diseases Levy, with little benefits in herd testing due to the disproportinate cutbacks in herd testing in Donegal.


They will also have to meet the increasing cost of private testing for sale, due to absence of herd testing.


EPIDEMIOLOGY

The central Epidemiology Unit provided for in Building on Reality, and subsequently established by the Department of Agriculture, has yet to make any real impact at industry level.


ON BEHALF OF:

NATIONAL CO-OPERATIVE MARTS COMMITTEE

 

&

 

ANIMAL HEALTH COMMITTEE

 

I.C.O.S

 

3/6/86.