« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
Animal Health and Welfare Strategy for Great Britain
Chapter 8: Delivering and enforcing standards effectively
8.1 Incentives and sanctions
If you are an owner or keeper of animals or if you have any stake in the health and welfare of animals, then delivery of the strategy is something that directly concerns and affects you. Delivery will take different forms including the way in which:
animals are cared for on a day to day basis;
livestock farmers and the wider industry manage the risks to their business;
legislation is complied with; and
the way Government delivers services to protect public health, animal health and welfare, the environment and the economy.
The benefits to animal owners of meeting their responsibilities include: Better economic return from healthier animals; Lower levels of inspection and control; Ensuring eligibility for CAP funds; Greater public confidence in the safety of food; Reaching society's expectations on the care of animals and of the environment; and Reduced risk of major outbreaks of animal disease.
The costs to animal owners of failing to meet their responsibilities include: Continued unacceptable levels of animal health and welfare; Poorer international reputation and disease status; Failure to meet public and taxpayer expectations; Reduced access to CAP funds; Tighter inspection and administrative sanction; Prosecution of offenders; Withdrawal of right to keep and care for animals; and Increased risk of further sanctions.
|
It is essential that effective incentives and sanctions are in place to ensure improved animal health and welfare standards. We have already outlined how practices to ensure animal health and welfare standards can provide benefits to society (public health and expectations over welfare), the environment (protection of the natural environment, biodiversity and wildlife) and the economy. These incentives need to be well understood and Government can play a role in making this happen.
There is a further incentive to comply with animal health and welfare legislation as risk based enforcement means that inspections are targeted towards those who are less likely to meet their responsibilities, or where failure to comply will have the greatest impact. However, a clear, firm and well-enforced system of sanctions must also be in place for those that are found not to be fully meeting their responsibilities or complying with legislation. For example, a failure to meet minimum animal health and welfare standards will affect EU subsidy payments under the arrangements for cross compliance. Animal health and welfare legislation provides essential protection for the economy, environment, animals and society as a whole, and must be properly observed.
8.2 Delivery of Government services
Government must ensure that whatever interventions it makes are consistently and effectively delivered and enforced. Any policy initiative, however, carefully constructed or scientifically sound, will not achieve the desired effect if it is not effectively translated into action. The reasons why and when Government intervenes in animal diseases and its chosen method of intervention need to be clearly communicated and understood, so that delivery priorities are clear.
Regulation is one of the main mechanisms used for Government intervention in animal health and welfare, either in the pursuit of national policies or to implement international obligations as a member of the European Union. Animal owners can expect that legislation will be implemented in the most appropriate way to minimise the regulatory burden, ensuring that benefits outweigh costs and that, whenever possible, alternative delivery mechanisms have been considered. The engagement of stakeholders and individuals in the decision-making and implementation process will increase their understanding and commitment to achieving the desired outcome. Animal owners must understand and accept their regulatory obligations.
The Whole Farm Approach In England the development of a Whole Farm Approach based on a self-assessment appraisal will provide livestock owners with a more accessible integrated approach to dealing with the Department and its agencies. They will have ready access to: - information concerning their business held within the Department's databases;
- details of regulatory requirements for the business; and
- indicators of best practice. This approach will reduce the amount of paperwork and demands for information that owners/keepers have to contend with and allow them to look at some of the wider aspects of their farming activity. |
Livestock register A register of animal information will initially be developed to cover the main farmed livestock species in Great Britain (cattle, sheep & goats and pigs); other species may be included later on. The register will improve the quality of livestock data while efficiencies (e.g. arising from increased use of electronic reporting methods and better access to information) will reduce costs both to industry and to Government. |
The relationship between Government and its delivery agents is crucial and requires a clear communication of priorities and risks. Arrangements will be in place with delivery agents which monitor performance against agreed outputs, report progress towards outcomes, and encompass review processes which look at overall performance as well as individual targets.
Framework Agreement The Framework Agreement between Government and Local Authorities in England and Wales on the structured delivery of services in animal health and welfare sets clear responsibilities, policy outcomes and mechanisms for agreeing delivery priorities which also reflect local circumstances and risks. |
A wide range of delivery agents have responsibilities for the delivery of animal health and welfare objectives. The Implementation Plans for England, Scotland and Wales provide more information on these delivery agents and the policies they deliver.
State Veterinary Service The State Veterinary Service will, in principle, become an Executive Agency on 1 April 2005. This approach, which separates policy and delivery, will provide greater understanding of roles. It will enable the SVS to develop further its expertise and professionalism, improve its delivery and build closer links with other operational partners and stakeholders. |
8.3 Prioritisation
Our approach to individual diseases and conditions has developed over the years through discussion with stakeholders, response to emerging disease situations at home and commitments to the wider international agenda. Neither Government nor industry have adopted a strategic approach, preventing development of an integrated system of controls and preventive measures.
For this strategy to work we all need to adopt a more structured and transparent framework for prioritisation. Disease profiles are being developed as part of this framework. They will contain comprehensive and validated information providing an evidence base which will be used as a tool by Government to inform priorities for surveillance and scientific research.
The livestock industry needs to use the disease profiles to ensure a common understanding of the health and welfare challenges they face, recognising future threats and the priorities for improvement. Appropriate strategies to manage the risk and improve and share knowledge on a partnership basis need to be put in place.
Sheep Scab Initiative The incidence of sheep scab has increased following an end to compulsory dipping in July 1992. To address this National Farmers Union Scotland (NFUS) brought together an all-industry group of stakeholders in Scotland (including National Sheep Association Scotland representatives, organic certification bodies, SAC and many others) to develop the Scottish Sheep Scab Initiative. The Initiative calls for sheep farmers to co-ordinate their action through treatment of their 'at risk' flocks. Its aim is to reduce the incidence of sheep scab in Scotland through: promoting and supporting best practice and biosecurity; minimising the impact of outbreaks; and maximising the effects of preventive action. Farmers can receive a free information pack from an NFUS hotline which contains vital information on how to prevent or identify and treat the disease, and anonymously report an outbreak. In the case of an outbreak report, details will be handed on to SAC to co-ordinate a response with a network of 'spotter' veterinary practices, which have been developed to alert clients and provide coordination and technical support to control any outbreak. |
Sustainable Control of Parasites in Sheep (SCOPS) Recently the prevalence of sheep intestinal parasite worms with resistance to anthelmintic drugs anthelmintic resistance (AR) has risen sharply in the UK. SCOPS is an industry-led group which intends to slow the progress of AR by giving farmers clear and consistent advice on sustainable parasite control. This is a current example of how Government is working in partnership with the industry to take a proactive approach to an emerging problem. Government has facilitated and sponsored research and the production of a technical manual, and SCOPS is taking ownership of communicating the need for changing practices throughout the sheep sector. |
The enforcement of animal welfare legislation is also subject to prioritisation. If an animal is suffering, or its welfare compromised, then putting the problem right is the top priority. In acute cases this will involve enforcement action from the State Veterinary Service, a Local Authority or the RSPCA/SSPCA. Where the problem lies with a system of animal keeping, rather than individual or acute suffering, then the system needs to be addressed through legislation and ideally at the European level. For example, Government is negotiating in Brussels to secure improved conditions for the transport of animals.
Enforcement is also focused on where the effort can do most good. Our top priority is thus to investigate complaints and follow up establishments known to be at high risk. A lower priority, though nevertheless important, is our work to understand the general level of animal welfare in the farm animal population and to identify and understand emerging conclusions.
Finally, in an area where feelings can often be stronger than knowledge and understanding, we give priority to professional and scientific understanding of animal welfare.
« Previous | Contents | Next »