ShareThis

.

.

30 January 2003

S1M-3766 British Cattle Movement Service

The Deputy Presiding Officer (Mr George Reid): The final item of business is a members' business debate on motion S1M-3766, in the name of Murdo Fraser, on the British Cattle Movement Service. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.
Motion debated,
That the Parliament notes the widespread concern amongst the Scottish farming community in relation to the operation of the British Cattle Movement Service (BCMS) and, in particular, the volume of administrative errors and the delays by the BCMS in dealing with correspondence; further notes that, as a result, the operation of the service has contributed to financial hardship in the farming sector at a time when farming incomes are already at desperately low levels, and considers that the Scottish Executive's Environment and Rural Affairs Department should institute an amnesty for all farmers that have been alleged by the BCMS not to have accurately and timeously supplied cattle record information and make representations to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs that a thorough review of the operation of the BCMS should be instituted with a view to eradicating the difficulties that have been identified.
17:11
... ... ...
17:18
Stewart Stevenson (Banff and Buchan) (SNP): I thank Murdo Fraser for providing us with the opportunity to discuss this important subject for rural Scotland. The devastating effects that high levels of error in the cattle-tracing system are having on farm incomes has been made only too clear to me in recent weeks.
We were told in a parliamentary answer today that farm incomes are expected to rise to an average of £10,500. That compares with the adverts on the back of Edinburgh buses that state that someone can make £18,500 driving a bus. The reward for the risk that farmers take and their effort is hardly adequate.
As we know, farmers live hand to mouth. I have one example of a farmer in my constituency who had 27 out of 30 cattle rejected on the basis of failed checks—his subsidies were frozen. Another farmer told me that he is owed £6,000, £4,000 of which he needs to pay urgent bills, and another has just received his payments for 2001.
Of course we need accurate records of cattle movements, but the system must not add to the heavy burdens that farmers have had in recent years. Farmers say that the book should be thrown at anyone who is cheating, but the farmers who are affected by this problem are not cheating; they are being cheated. The current system is not sustainable, fair or equitable.
When a farmer submits a subsidy claim form to SEERAD, he has to sign a declaration that states:
"I shall rectify ... the data kept on the cattle tracing database relating to me or my animals where this is incorrect or incomplete."
Members may think that that is fair enough—the farmer should be responsible for his stock—but the caveat is that, if the beast is sold at the mart or goes for slaughter, it is the mart's duty to inform the BCMS, not the farmer's, but the farmer retains legal responsibility for the mistake.
Amazingly, SEERAD does not shy away from that—although the subsidy claim forms put the responsibility at the farmer's door, a letter from SEERAD to a farmer in my constituency freely admits that failed checks
"could be attributed to SEERAD, BCMS, other operators within the industry or the farmers themselves."
Any of those players in what is a complicated game might make any number of mistakes, but our hard-pressed farmers must carry the can.
Could farmers be more active in checking their records? That is great in theory, but in practice they are hitting a brick wall. The BCMS records show cows as heifers, calves that do not exist and beasts that are alive and well, down on the farm, as slaughtered—the list is endless.
Some farmers get through and make the call. A farmer to whom I have spoken in the past 24 hours spent four hours on the phone sorting out the errors on his records, only to find that, a week later, none of the corrections had been made. That case is far from isolated. If farmers are to be 100 per cent sure of the records' accuracy, a phone call would have to be made to the BCMS for every on and off movement, which is simply not possible.
It is unacceptable that farmers are being forced to take legal responsibility for others' mistakes. The system is unfair and must be simplified. Those who make errors should be held to account, and fines for farmers should be suspended until the system works satisfactorily. I call on the minister to make representations to ensure that staff at the BCMS are adequately trained and are in sufficient numbers to deal with the work load. Farmers are considered guilty until they prove themselves innocent, which goes against natural justice. I am sure that all members will agree that that is unacceptable, and must stop at once.
17:22

Stewart Stevenson
does not gather, use or
retain any cookie data.

However Google who publish for us, may do.
fios ZS is a name registered in Scotland for Stewart Stevenson
www.blogger.com www.ourblogtemplates.com


  © Blogger templates The Professional Template by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP