AGRICULTURE is a devolved matter, meaning policies can be specifically tailored to suit Scottish circumstances.
However, the same does not hold true for animal health, where the overall remit lies with the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, whose Secretary of State is Hilary Benn.
Bovine tuberculosis is a huge issue in England and parts
of Wales: last year 28,000 cattle were culled and the total this year is expected to reach at least 40,000 head. This year Scotland has had little more than half a dozen confirmed cases with most of those being traced back to "imports" from England.
However, Scottish herds still have to be tested on a regular basis to maintain their high health status. The majority of testing in Scotland is undertaken by private vets working as local veterinary inspectors (LVIs) on behalf of the government. But it is increasingly clear that vets are far from happy with the fees they are receiving.
There is a real danger that selective industrial action may be taken in the autumn that could result in some herds being untested with subsequent movement restrictions imposed.
Sandy Clark, who is based in Thurso, is the secretary of the Scottish branch of the British Veterinary Association.
He said: "We haven't had a review of the fee structure for almost five years and that is obviously unsatisfactory. The fees are on a sliding scale, based on herd numbers, but the reality is that on some smaller units where the handling facilities may be less than adequate our members are frequently working for less than the minimum wage. That cannot continue."
Discussions between the profession and Animal Health, the organisation formerly known as the State Veterinary Service, have been underway since February, but there is little sign of a resolution.
There are now no more than 60 practices in Scotland where the major focus is on large animals and many of those are feeling under financial pressure. There is a widely held view is that vets can make more money from treating small animals and horses, while also being relieved of being called out in the middle of the night to calve a cow or supervise a difficult lambing of an expensive pedigree ewe.
But Clark was keen to stress that there is still a serious commitment to livestock farming.
He said: "We most certainly don't wish to break off relations with farmer clients, who are highly valued, but there has to be a sensible approach from Animal Health."
Nigel Miller, vice-president of NFU Scotland, said: "Our excellent record on animal health is dependent on preserving our declining network of large animal veterinary practices. The viability of these is underpinned by the LVI work they carry out. It is wholly appropriate that the fees associated with delivering services, such as TB testing, fully reflect the cost that this entails.
"For farmers due to test their herds for TB, our advice is to contact your vet and discuss a date for the visit. Under current rules, if a herd test is not completed on time, then movement restrictions can apply."
The Scottish Government has indicated that it would like the matter of animal health devolved, but is treading warily for now. At the centre of the issue is Defra's determination that compensation for any future major disease epidemic should be on a "cost-sharing" basis.
The foot-and-mouth crisis of 2001 cost the Treasury more than £4 billion, of which £177 million was paid to Scottish farmers, in direct compensation. It is clear that no government would ever again countenance forking out such vast sums.
In the next few weeks, probably when the House of Commons returns after the summer recess, Defra is expected to announce its proposals. The belief in the farming industry is that producers will be required to pay a headage levy on all animals. The NFU of England and Wales has said the Defra outline is more akin to cost-dumping than cost-sharing.
The full article contains 676 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
