DAVID RICHARDSON
When I first read in The Sunday Times about DEFRAs plans to introduce a Bill of Rights (it has since denied thats what it is, but thats what it sounds like) for pets, I checked the date to see if it was Apr 1. No, it was Apr 28 and the article previewed a Bill that was brought before Parliament on Apr 30. There has been much comment on it from all branches of the media since. Lord Hattersley, a well-known dog-owner and long-time Labour Party member, called it barking mad. And there have been less polite descriptions of DEFRAs initiative.
It goes without saying that none of the critics of the measure, including me, advocate cruelty to pet animals. Of course, we should make sure they are well fed, well exercised and happy and it is right that people found guilty of ill-treating their animals should be punished and stopped from doing so again. Indeed, I was under the impression that the RSPCA was doing as good a job as can be done of policing such standards.
But that is not the issue. The aspect that angers me about the whole matter is how a government department which is known to be seriously understaffed and under-funded, can find the time and money for what might be described as trivial legislation when there are a host of crises affecting human beings that should be receiving its urgent attention. Unless, of course, the governments spin-doctors have advised that the "pet vote" is there for the taking on the back of such legislation.
In the same Sunday newspaper there was another article on the growth of so-called "biodynamic farming". Apparently this is an extreme branch of the organic movement and involves, among other things, planting crops according to the signs of the zodiac and burying cows horns in the soil twice a year. The earths natural forces are then said to be released and the crops and livestock produced are claimed to be healthier and tastier than even standard organic. The report claimed there were now some 80 farms being run in this way in the UK.
It further implied they were receiving grants from DEFRA to enable them to continue their mystic farming.
Now, Im a tolerant sort of chap. But my tolerance was stretched to its limits when I read those two articles. And I asked myself – where on earth is this country going? Are there really significant numbers of people in Britain who believe in witchcraft? What happened to scientific analysis? Has the government completely lost its marbles? Or is it more sinister than that?
Is the support DEFRA is apparently giving to questionable fringe interests merely a smokescreen to mask its inactivity in more fundamental areas? Are such measures taken to provide an illusion of activity to try to confuse the people of Britain into thinking ministers are doing something? For as Sir Don Curry almost admitted on the radio a few days ago his recommendations, published four months ago with URGENT stamped all over them, appear to have been substantially pushed on to the back burner.
But if, while they are waiting for Chancellor of the Exchequer Gordon Brown to come up with the £500m the Curry report called for, DEFRA ministers would like to do something worthwhile, might I suggest a Bill of Rights for farmers. Indeed, I would like to suggest a few clauses that could be included. In line with the basis for the pets charter, let us begin with The Five Freedoms.
Farmers should be guaranteed:
Freedom from poverty and stress, induced by currency distortion and unfair competition for markets as a result of bullying buyers in the UK and cheap labour together with lack of equivalent regulation applied to imports.
Freedom from interference by single-issue pressure groups that seek to change the way farmers live their lives for political rather than ethical reasons.
Freedom from harassment and inaccurate criticism by government, society and the media and the immediate correction of and compensation for any instances that occur.
Freedom to earn equivalent rewards for equivalent work and investment to the rest of society, much of which exploits its majority without recognising farmings contribution to its well-being.
Freedom from the threat of unnecessary and unjust bankruptcy because government and society fail to understand or care what happens to farmers in the misguided belief that British food is not important.
Alongside those freedoms there should be a declaration by government that it will find ways to correct the imbalance between the opposite ends of the food chain. The current situation in which suppliers are producing at less than cost, while retailers continue to post record profits, is unsustainable.
And if so-called "production subsidies" have to be reduced or removed in order to comply with international agreements, DEFRA should guarantee that an amount at least equivalent to that cut should be ring-fenced and paid back to farmers, without deduction, for other services, such as landscape care, that they provide for the community.
Finally, the government should give public recognition of the contribution farming makes to the nations health, environment and low cost of living.
That would be a Bill of Rights worth having.
Never mind a
ridiculous Bill of
Rights for pets, how
about Five Freedoms
for farmers?
DAVID RICHARDSON