The British minister for agriculture, Mr Douglas Hogg, was rebuffed yesterday by his EU colleagues when he hinted that his government wants to reopen the agreement on beef culling reached in Florence last June. Mr Hogg insists he has scientific evidence to show that the supplementary cull of 140,000 cattle agreed there as a means of restoring confidence to the consumer market is unnecessary. The other ministers are incredulous that the British should try to reopen the question so soon.
This latest twist of the story illustrates the peculiar mixture of science and politics that has characterised the BSE crisis all along, as a result of the collapse of consumer confidence. Demand for beef is still substantially down in the main European markets, particularly in Germany, but much less so in Britain itself. This reinforces the general trend away from red meat products, which must be a very worrying factor for all involved in the industry, particularly those in the export trade.
This point must be made forcefully to British representatives, who do not seem to be properly aware of the generalised nature of the crisis the BSE scare has provoked for agricultural production in the EU. Certainly, British farmers have to bear the brunt of the culling because Britain is by far the largest source of the disease. And Mr Hogg has to be careful not to antagonise his EU fellow ministers who are, after all, providing most of the funds for the culling. Compensation could be withdrawn if British co-operation is withheld.
English farmers export a very small percentage of their beef product, compared to some 80 per cent in Ireland. In Northern Ireland and Scotland there is a much higher proportion of exports and also a far smaller incidence of the disease, and therefore a more effective means of tracing diseased animals. This forms the basis of the strong case made on behalf of Northern Ireland and Scottish farmers to be allowed to implement the selective cull forthwith, thereby earning the selective regional right to have the export ban lifted. This may be all right from the scientific point of view, but it is decidedly unsatisfactory politically for a Conservative government which wants to fight the forthcoming election on a platform of nationalist opposition to European (or Scottish) encroachments on British sovereignty.
The fact that this nationalism takes on an English rather than a British face ought not to be lost on Scottish and Northern Irish farmers or voters. To concede a regional response might provide yet another example of Brussels gold being used to achieve the breakup of the United Kingdom, in the eyes of the true nationalists who have become so influential on the back benches of the ruling party. All this should give unionists in the North, many of them farmers, reason to think about an alternative approach, in which cooperation on the island of Ireland would provide better representation of their interests. This seems to have been the subject of interesting conversations in Brussels between the Minister for Agriculture, Mr Yates and Baroness Dent on of the Northern Ireland Office.