Elliot Morley said that it was "established fact" and "a matter of record" that farmers who lawfully resisted contiguous cull had caused increased spread of the disease, prolonging the epidemic and increasing the overall slaughter total.

Morley said there was "proof" and "evidence" of this, and that there was "no argument about it".

No argument about it ... Oh! Really ... that's what he would like to believe ! What does this man smoke?

The front page of last Friday's (2 Nov) Western Morning News carried the headline "A shameless act of scapegoating".

He is reported as saying that two independent reports had proved the contiguous cull played a crucial role in containing the spread of the disease.

"We have proof that in other parts of the country neighbouring premises became infected because the contiguous cull was delayed, and farmers appealed against slaughter - that resulted in more animals being killed than needed to be. I'm not saying this did happen in Devon, but there is considerable evidence that it did happen nationally".

There is "considerable" evidence to prove he is talking his usual ignorant plethora of piffle and tripe.

Here are some REAL facts that can be proven and are in the public domain – unlike Morley's nauseous tripe.

There is NO evidence whatsoever of any farm in Devon that had resisted the contiguous cull, subsequently developed the disease, let alone spread it to other premises nearby.

If that is the case in Devon, why should it be different anywhere else ? Alan and Rosie proved that it was no different!

Alan and Rosie Beat (Devonshire farmers) had been in contact with many others all over the country affected by FMD, only to hear the same message everywhere; there was no evidence of those who had "resisted" the contiguous cull had caused a spread of disease to their neighbours. All their cattle remained healthy – as they did in Devon. So what in hell's name is Morley pedalling here ?

Alayne Addy (solicitor) and Anthony Gibson of the NFU South West region would be able confirm this, along with many others. Here is what Alayne said,
"I helped over 200 farmers throughout the UK and (apart from the one farmer who noticed symptoms a few hours after he had rung me for a chat because he was contiguous - he did not get round to lodging an appeal sadly) NONE of their healthy livestock subsequently contracted FMD. that is a FACT. In addition, ALL of 'my' healthy livestock subsequently blood-tested NEGATIVE to antibodies in MAFF's tests. It is also worth remembering that I and my farmers did not take up any challenge in the courts - only after 8 weeks of successful appeals (by way of written letters and negotiating) did MAFF themselves bring 4 court cases against farmers in England and Wales (3 were mine and 1 was Burgess Salmon)."

Commenting further Alayne said:
"So quite what Elliott Morley was talking about yesterday I don't know.... he had better re-visit his files before he make any further silly and erroneous statements. I strongly feel that this new animal health (death) bill is wrong and flawed.... in terms of the contiguous cull it does not consider section 6 of the Human Rights Act (right to fair and independent hearings for all citizens) and ignores the existing EU FMD Directives (no systematic culling of anything other than FMD livestock). and hidden in the text is wholescale culling of scrapie susceptible sheep and something about tagging... all very sad indeed."

The scientific (Ha!) evidence that Morley is relying on for pushing this new Animal Health (DEATH) Bill is none other than the computer models, headed by one, Professor Roy Anderson, who has led government policy down the garden path (not that difficult) throughout the FMD war on British farming.

So what Morley was referring to when he spoke of "undeniable facts", "scientific evidence", "certain proof", "beyond dispute" etc were the same unscientifically irrelevant brains (was it cows or was it sheep?) that predicted it would all be over by the 7th June!

He was relying on the guys in white coats from Imperial College modelling club.

Look what Imperial College came up with.

One month (May 2001) they said FMD was spread by close animal contact (hence the panic to carry out that stupid contiguous cull policy) then months later (Oct 2001) they did a bit of "spin" and changed their minds (proving the contiguous cull policy was founded on BAD science) and gave us another theory to play with.

Here is the evidence of BAD science in those modelling techniques and conclusions – it amounts to garbage in…garbage out (ALL credit to Alan Beat for unfurling their scientific modelling cock-up).

Our "modellers" could be compared to cream-puff bakers working as mechanical engineers in the Grand Prix pits:

In October, the second scientific ‘paper’ contradicts the first by stating

"The newly estimated spatial kernel differed significantly from that previously derived from the infectious contacts identified by MAFF, with considerably more long-distance transmission events being predicted.

"This implies significant biases in the MAFF contact-tracing process, with closer contacts being more easily identified.

Bang goes the "contiguous cull" (24/48hrs timetable) theory for being the mutts-nuts to eradicate FMD.

Now Morley and his raving monster loony party want more "powers" to fight any disease in any animal and to hell with Human Rights – they are mad and we have to apprehend them as they did farmers and their animals.

As Alan and his wife Rosie point out, these "modelling programmes" and perhaps more importantly, programmers, must be exposed for what they really are - nothing more than desk-bound biomathematicians whose ideas of what may possibly, maybe, might, perhaps, happen when certain stabs of combinations of circumstances are made, seduce slack politicians to believe in spurious and theoretical speculations based on unproven theory.

To quote Alan:
"What has gone so tragically wrong here is that predictive techniques are being completely misused and misunderstood by politicians, to become science that must be obeyed when it is no such thing".

So I put it to you all, as strongly as I can, that Morley must be grilled, without mercy, on his totally unfounded and very serious, erroneous and damaging allegations when he sits before the Select Committee on Tuesday (6th Nov) – if not then, we can catch him another time!

I say that because they are his lever to get this jack-booted Bill through Parliament. A Bill built on a foundation of hypocritical lies and complete dribble. Pass me the proof you scientific modellers; on second thoughts, don't bother, I'll find my own cracked crystal ball.

Bryn

----------------------------------------

For the Press :