The BCG vaccine is frequently mentioned as the most common vaccine to help protect against TB. It has been used to protect people from the human form of the disease, although more recently in the UK the vaccination programme has been stopped owing to its poor cost effectiveness. An injectable form has recently been licensed for use on badgers. Could it be used for cattle? Is it a reliable vaccination and has it helped prevent the human form of TB?
12 Jun 2013, 7:35 PM
Cattle: Vaccination Caroline Lucas: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (1) what the current status is of his discussions with the European Commission on cattle vaccine trials in England; and if he will make a statement; 
(2) what recent progress he has made on discussions with the European Commission on cattle vaccine trials in England; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr Heath: EU Commissioner Tonio Borg wrote to the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, the right hon. Member for North Shropshire (Mr Paterson), on 14 January 2013 setting out the substantial scientific evidence that will be needed before any decision can be taken on lifting the current EU ban on cattle vaccination. For that reason, his view is that it would be reasonable to expect the full process to take 10 years. The Secretary of State and I will continue to discuss this important issue with the Commissioner as and when the need arises.
We are looking for ways to accelerate the work we were already doing on the required experimental research and planning the subsequent large scale trialling of the vaccine that the Commissioner regards as the essential next step. We hope to have successfully completed all the experimental work, including studies on safety of meat and milk, during 2014 so that we can make an application to the Veterinary Medicines Directorate for an Animal Test Certificate to begin the necessary field trials.
5 Jun 2013, 7:33 PM
Emailed comment from Rethink Bovine TB:
'We have argued that a licence for trials must be available, and we were right. However the Committee could have explained the reinterpretation of EU law better.
Most importantly they do not understand herd immunity and confuse it with acquired immunity in the young.
Emailed comments received today re The Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee report on vaccination.
From MR: 'Interestingly, I don’t see anything in the EFRACOM document that adds significantly to the case for a badger cull. What it does highlight are shortcomings of cattle testing regimens.'
From P: '... much criticism of Defra - page 34, Conclusions and Recommendations - including the line: "It is perplexing that the Government has maintained that field trials were prohibited under EU law when, as recent events have shown, this is not the case."
What about cost? The Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee report says :
(para 34) 'Widespread use of a cattle vaccine and DIVA test will increase the costs of a TB eradication programme, at least in the short term. Professor Hewinson estimated the cost of the vaccine at £5-6 per dose and the DIVA test at £25.54 Studies have so far suggested that vaccination will be needed annually. Sensitisation to the skin test falls off so that after nine months only 10% of animals test positive as a result of the vaccination. Therefore, it may be that in a TB clear herd only 10% of animals will require the DIVA test - notwithstanding conditions on animal movement. A clear record must be kept of animals vaccinated to ensure the DIVA test is not used unnecessarily. This will add an administrative cost to a programme of vaccination. The use of a vet to ensure that vaccinated animals are correctly identified may add a further charge. Over the longer term Defra models predict vaccination could result in a saving: the model predicts vaccinating cattle in yearly tested parishes would cost around £170-180 million over the period from introduction in 2012 to the end of the modelled period in 2026. It predicts benefits from fewer breakdowns and less routine testing of between £150-250 million, potentially saving up to one fifth of the costs of the current policy measures. The benefits from vaccinating cattle in yearly tested parishes are likely to justify its costs over this period.'
(Para 35) 'A vaccine that is 65% effective will not immediately solve the problems of bovine TB within the cattle industry. Over the short term, its use will be an additional financial cost and may lead to an increase in the administrative and testing burdens farmers already face. While it will be a useful tool to have, the circumstances in which it might be used, the precise objectives of applying it and levels of protection that would be needed to make vaccination worthwhile need careful consideration. Before deployment the Government must undertake and publish a robust cost-benefit analysis. The analysis must also consider the extent to which EU financial support would be available for such a programme.
5 Jun 2013, 2:44 PM
... and, of course, legislation will need changing. The Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee report says :
(Para 32) 'For a cattle vaccine to be available for general use, existing European legislation has to be amended. Mr Van Goethem believed that the political will existed across Europe for this change to occur, partly because other countries may want to use the vaccine but also on grounds of cost: the largest financial support package to eradicate animal disease is spent on the UK and it is therefore in the interests of other Member States for this to change. As Mr Van Goethem pointed out ‘What we give to the UK we do not give to other Member States’.
(Para 33). Proposals for a new EU Animal Health Law may make it easier to change the rules prohibiting vaccination. The new law, which is currently being drafted, will replace all existing legislation linked to animal health repealing approximately 60 different pieces of legislation. It aims to give an overarching framework on all rules linked to animal health: for trade of animals, eradication of disease, and animal health rules for products. Jacqueline Minor, Head of the Commission Representation in London, considered the new law would be likely to make it easier to change the rules on vaccination: Currently they would have to be changed by primary legislation, so it would have to be a proposal for a directive of the Council and the Parliament. Within the framework of the new legislation, once adopted, it would be possible to change the rules on vaccination by a delegated measure, which would be much quicker in principle.'
5 Jun 2013, 2:36 PM
The Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee refer to the forthcoming field trials for cattle vaccination. Unbelievably these will take yet another ten years, and this is only an estimate, in this ongoing and never-ending saga that affects so many people and animals.
'So It is difficult to envisage Defra designing field trials of the scope and size requested by the Commission without using the commercial herd. In doing so, the Government must take steps to reassure the public that such field trials will not pose a public health risk. The Government must also make sure that farmers volunteering their herds for these trials are not left financially disadvantaged. We look forward to seeing details of the programme for field trials once it is agreed.'
'We welcome the ongoing dialogue between the UK, EU and OIE. A good working relationship is vital to ensuring early success in the development and deployment of a vaccine to help combat bovine TB. The indicative 10-year timetable set down by the Commission is precisely that, indicative. The UK Government should do all it can to condense the timetable without compromising the collection of the robust field data necessary to satisfy the VMD and European and international communities. Once the programme for field trials is agreed we look forward to the Government publishing its own indicative timetable for the use of a cattle vaccine. We accept that such a timetable may be subject to change but any changes must be clearly explained.'
5 Jun 2013, 2:34 PM
So just why have there been so many delays? The Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee don't know and the report says: ' It is perplexing that the Government has maintained that field trials were prohibited under EU law when, as recent events have shown, this is not the case. We accept that field trials might be permitted only if certain criteria are met, the development of the DIVA test being one of them, but to have stated that legislative change is required is misleading. It would be unfortunate if the Government’s interpretation of the legislation had delayed progress in delivering a vaccine.
We are not convinced that the Government had to wait until all the ‘factors were in place’ before approaching the Commission. However, while we believe negotiations could and should have begun earlier, we welcome the efforts of the Government and the Commission in coming to an agreement that field trials might take place in the UK. '
5 Jun 2013, 2:26 PM
The Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee has published its report today on progress to develop a vaccine solution for bovine TB. Looking at the section on 'Field trials' the following extract is interesting and one does wonder if all the many other vaccines that are licensed and used on cattle have been subject to this extent of scrutiny? We know, for example, that a EU derogation for the vaccine against Bluetongue disease was expedited enabling it to be used in the UK very quickly. The BCG vaccine is widely considered to be one of the safest vaccines available and has been in use for a very long time. In addition one does wonder if such trials were done re the tuberculin skin test where some lactating/meat animals are given doses every sixty days.
'Fundamental scientific information is not yet available on the reliability and feasibility of cattle vaccination accompanied by use of DIVA test(s) that is fundamental for a possible change in the current EU policy on the control and eradication of bTB. Future studies should also address food safety concerns (shedding of vaccine strain in milk), human health concerns (BCG is the only vaccine available for humans and its use in cattle may lead to the selection of BCG-resistant strains of bTB that may affect also humans) and animal health and trade concerns (proper discrimination between vaccinated and infected animals, costs/benefits of vaccination policy, current policy, acceptability of vaccinated animals in international trade).'
5 Jun 2013, 2:17 PM
The Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee has published its report today on progress to develop a vaccine solution for bovine TB. Bovine TB has been a problem for decades ... funding and research has been ongoing yet those involved have only recently considered the EU implications of field trials in the UK. This is appalling and there is no good reason for such delay.
'The EU prohibition on cattle vaccination has caused the Government difficulties in collecting scientific data on the performance of the vaccine under UK field conditions. The efficacy of the cattle BCG vaccine has been tested in ‘experimentally infected animals, with a mean level of protection (measured as a reduction in visible pathology scores) of 70%’ but these studies cannot provide a definite figure for vaccine efficacy when administered to cattle under field conditions in the UK. Modelling the level of efficacy required for herd immunity, both on its own and in conjunction with other measures such as biosecurity and movement controls is critically important. Such data are crucial to determining whether BCG would be sufficiently effective to justify its use.'
5 Jun 2013, 2:05 PM
The Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee has published its report today on progress to develop a vaccine solution for bovine TB. We know that no vaccination is perfect. Oddly there is sparse mention of the herd immunity benefits for cattle (although there is more detail in the section devoted to badgers). This would make the vaccination option viable and on low risk herds why would such regular testing still be necessary?
'At present, the only vaccine for tackling TB is the Bacille Calmette-Guérin (BCG) vaccine. Studies have shown that the BCG cattle vaccine, as with BCG in other species, does not guarantee complete protection but rather provides a spectrum of protection:
Some cattle will be fully protected; Some will benefit from reduced disease; Some will get no protection from vaccination; and Vaccination does not have a therapeutic effect on cattle that are already infected.'
5 Jun 2013, 1:56 PM
The Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee has published its report today on progress to develop a vaccine solution for bovine TB. Here are the reasons why we cannot vaccinate yet.
'Vaccination against bTB is explicitly forbidden in the EU legislation on disease control (Council Directive 78/52/EEC) and implicitly also in intra-Union trade legislation, as vaccination is not compatible with the provisions for testing and herd qualification (Council Directive 64/432/EEC). EU legislation is fully in line with OIE standards on international trade and can be changed only by the European Parliament and the Council. Deploying a vaccine in the face of the European ban could lead to a ban on the trade in live cattle, meat and dairy products with other EU countries. In 2011, these trades amounted to £496,000, £490m and £1.2bn respectively. It is likely that countries outside of the European Union would follow the EU’s lead.'
5 Jun 2013, 1:44 PM
The Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee has published its report today on progress to develop a vaccine solution for bovine TB. The quality of the information provided has not been good enough.
'Our inquiry has shown that the quality of information in the public domain about the availability of the cattle vaccine and oral badger vaccine and the efficacy of the injectable badger vaccine has not been good enough. There is a great deal of interest in this subject and the Government can do better in satisfying it.'
'During the last 18 months the debate on the availability of a cattle vaccine for bovine TB has been characterised by a lack of clarity and public misunderstanding. Although it is by no means solely responsible, the Government must accept a great deal of the blame for this. The quality and accuracy of the information that Defra has put in the public domain has been insufficient and inadequate. It is unfortunate that this has led to debate over the timetable for use of the vaccine overshadowing scientific breakthroughs in the development of both the vaccine and DIVA test that should be applauded. '
Over recent months it is clear that the Government has recognised that it should do more to inform the public. Professor Boyd told us that the Government is working on a TB eradication strategy that will show ‘all the methods that are available for eradication, when they are going to come on line and what their contribution is going to be to the ultimate eradication of TB.’26 We await publication of the TB eradication strategy with interest and expect it to include not only information on those methods that are available for the eradication of bovine TB but progress on those in development. The launch of the strategy must be accompanied by a public information campaign to make the position clear in the public’s mind and dispel misunderstanding. '
5 Jun 2013, 1:39 PM
The Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee has published its report today on progress to develop a vaccine solution for bovine TB. With the current failings of the existing skin test (acknowledged elsewhere), cattle movements will always risk spreading the disease elsewhere whatever other measures are introduced:
'For too long the Government’s strategy for dealing with bovine TB has been reactive and followed the spread of infection. The increase in cases of bovine TB in cattle demonstrates that the Government needs a strategy that will jump ahead of infection. Cattle vaccination is a tool that may allow it to do that in the future but for now increased bio-security and rigorous movement controls are vital. It will be no good vaccinating badgers to create a firewall against the spread of infection only for it to be compromised by movement of infected cattle.'
5 Jun 2013, 11:18 AM
The Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee has published its report today on progress to develop a vaccine solution for bovine TB.
Launching the report, (Vaccination against bovine TB, HC 258) Anne McIntosh MP, EFRA Committee Chair said:
“While progress to develop vaccines is clearly being made, debate on this subject has been characterised by lack of clarity leading to poor public understanding. The Government must share a great deal of the blame for this.
“The Government is right to invest millions of pounds in developing vaccines against bovine TB. We should use every tool to combat this disease, but vaccination alone will not, at least in the short-term, provide a complete solution. Vaccines have no impact on already infected animals, offer a range of protection to those that aren’t infected, and will be expensive to deploy.”
Successive governments have invested more than £43 million on vaccine research and development since 1994. By the end of the current spending review period, Defra will have spent a further £15 million. Deployment of the injectable badger vaccine will cost an estimated £2,000-£4,000 per km2. The cattle vaccine is expected to cost £5-6 per dose and the DIVA test (which differentiates between infected and vaccinated cattle) costs £25, in addition to existing testing costs.
A vaccine for cattle
Timetable for use
In January 2013 the European Commission set out an indicative ten-year timetable for the cattle BCG vaccine and DIVA test to become available for use. The Commission was clear this process must include extensive field trials of both the vaccine and DIVA test under UK field conditions.
“The indicative timetable set down by the Commission is precisely that: indicative! The Government must do all it can to speed up progress without compromising collection of the robust field data needed to satisfy the Veterinary Medicines Directorate, European Commission and OIE (World Organisation for Animal Health). Once a programme of field trials is agreed, we look forward to the Government publishing its own timetable for use of a vaccine on cattle. We accept that plans may alter but any change must be clearly explained,” added Anne McIntosh.
Small-scale studies to test the efficacy of the vaccine in cattle in Ethiopia and Mexico have shown the protective effect to be between 56-68%. A vaccine offering this level of protection won’t immediately solve the problems of bovine TB in the cattle industry.
”This vaccine will be no magic bullet,” warned Anne McIntosh. “Before deployment the Government must undertake and publish a robust cost-benefit analysis. Over the short term, use of the vaccine will impose an additional cost and may increase the administrative and testing burdens farmers already face. The circumstances in which it might be used, the precise objectives for applying it, and levels of protection that make the vaccine worth while all need careful consideration.”
An injectable vaccine for badgers
An injectable BCG vaccine for badgers has been available for use since March 2010. It does not confer complete protection and has no discernible effect on animals already infected with TB. Small-scale studies suggest that vaccination reduces the risk of a positive result to the most sensitive and specific test for bovine TB by 54%, but substantial data showing the effect of the badger vaccine in the field is lacking.
“Deployment of an injectable badger vaccine is one means by which we could create a healthier badger population, but there are many unknowns to overcome if it is to be viable, and it will be expensive. To be cost-effective deployment must focus on areas where it will have the biggest impact,” said Anne McIntosh
An oral vaccine for badgers
An oral baited vaccine for badgers that can be laid at setts is likely to be cheaper and more practical than an injectable version for vaccinating large numbers of badgers. Development of an oral vaccine (along with a suitable bait and a strategy for deployment) pose many challenges that will take several years to resolve.
“Once developed, an oral vaccine is unlikely to provide an immediate or complete solution. If herd immunity can be achieved, then it will still take many years as well as considerable effort and expense. While this is the most likely way to create a healthy badger population, it is vital the challenges involved are fully understood by all those interested in this subject,” said Anne McIntosh.
The UK currently relies on a skin test that could miss one in four infected cows. Liver fluke, Johne’s disease and even pregnancy may impact the result of a skin test. If other more sensitive tests exist, MPs argue these should also be employed.
“It is frustrating to hear government officials acknowledge that the current testing regime misses infectious cattle when the gamma interferon test, a blood test of greater sensitivity, catches the disease earlier. Despite the cost, the Government must explore whether we can use this test more widely to bear down on the disease, “ says Anne McIntosh.
A variety of ongoing research projects could make a real difference to the eradication of bovine TB in the United Kingdom. These include: PCR testing to determine infected badger setts, a new type of test to identify bovine TB in cattle after slaughter, and work on a vaccine that does not interfere with the skin test.
“Throughout this inquiry the Committee have been impressed by the scientific research under way to discover solutions to the problem of bovine TB. It is crucial that the Government continues to invest in this research,” adds Anne McIntosh.
Committee Membership is as follows: Miss Anne McIntosh (Chair), Thomas Docherty, Richard Drax, George Eustice, Barry Gardiner, Mrs Mary Glindon, Iain McKenzie, Sheryll Murray, Neil Parish, Ms Margaret Ritchie, Dan Rogerson
Specific Committee Information: firstname.lastname@example.org/ 020 7219 6194/ 020 7219 3262
Media Information: Hannah Pearce email@example.com/ 020 7219 8430
Twitter: Follow the EFRA Committee on twitter @CommonsEFRA
Committee Website: www.parliament.uk/efracom
Watch committees and parliamentary debates online: www.parliamentlive.tv
Publications / Reports / Reference Material: Copies of all select committee reports are available from the Parliamentary Bookshop (12 Bridge St, Westminster, 020 7219 3890) or the Stationery Office (0845 7023474). Committee reports, press releases, evidence transcripts, Bills; research papers, a directory of MPs, plus Hansard (from 8am daily) and much more, can be found onwww.parliament.uk
A depressing read for those of us that have been campaigning on this subject for years and seen the goalposts moved so regularly. The timescale for vaccination - because of the EU bureaucracy - is now a staggering ten years before cattle vaccination can be introduced and even then this is only a possible guideline. Badgers are being vaccinated NOW so why can't farmers have the right to vaccinate their cattle NOW?
27 Apr 2013, 8:42 AM
Scientists at The University of Nottingham are studying whether harmful bacteria found in cattle could be harnessed to protect livestock from the devastating disease bovine tuberculosis (TB). The research, being led by Professor Paul Barrow in the University's School of Veterinary Medicine and Science, could offer an important step towards developing a vaccine against bovine TB, which affects tens of thousands of cattle every year. The study will investigate the disease in UK and Chinese cattle in collaboration with Professor Xiangmei Zhou at Beijing's China Agricultural University. The two-year project has been funded with a -200,000 grant from the Research Councils UK (RCUK) and Chinese Ministry of Science and Technology (MoST) China-UK Cooperation Programme in Global Priorities. Professor Barrow said: "We have discovered very interesting and novel interactions between different bacterial types during mixed infections. One bacterial type can stimulate short term immunity against unrelated bacteria providing a degree of protection. We want to look to see if a similar relationship occurs between the bovine tubercle bascillus and other bacteria which are present in the tissues at the same time." In China, bovine TB is now a major economic problem, causing hardship for farmers and their families living in rural communities. In any one herd, up to 70 per cent of cattle can be affected. Bovine TB is also a zoonosis - an infectious disease that can cross the species barrier to spread from animal to human. In the UK, early detection means the disease is never allowed to reach the point where it can threaten human health. However, in China some spread of the bacterium which is the origin of the disease, Mycobacterium bovis, does result in some human tuberculosis. TB is a chronic disease that eats away at the lungs over a long period of time, eventually leading to breathing difficulties. Effective treatment can take up to two years, which is not a practical or financial option for impoverished people often living in remote locations. The Nottingham scientists will be investigating whether being infected by other related bacteria could offer a protective effect against bovine TB. In particular, they are looking at another common cattle bacterium called Mycobacterium paratuberculosis, which causes the gut wasting condition Johne's Disease and has been tentatively linked with Crohn's disease in humans. The researchers will be using advanced microarray technology to test samples from cattle from both the UK and China to detect the mixture of bacteria that may be present in a single animal. Colleagues in China will be conducting in vitro assays in cell culture to study whether the presence of one bacterium may affect the immune system in response to another.
As part of the 'Ask Defra' initiative via Twitter, Rethink bTB asked; 'Will EU field trials of BCG Cattle Vacc +DIVA test start this year?'.
Defra's response was; 'We are working hard to design field trials with EU at the moment. No start date as yet.'
One wonders why it has taken so very long to get to this stage?
3 Apr 2013, 6:18 PM
According to an article in Farmers Weekly www.fwi.co.uk/articles/03/04/2013/138422/heath-defends-government-on-bovine-tb-vaccinations.htm the government i, once again, procrastinating.
Despite the farm minister, David Heath, rejecting suggestions that the government is dragging its heels when it comes to introducing a cattle vaccination for bovine TB. the years of lack of proper action is now very apparent.
Giving evidence to he Environment, Food and Rural Affairs select committee last month, Mr Heath said that introducing the BCG vaccine was a very long process and there was a big difference between having a viable vaccine and getting to the point where it could be legally used in the UK. Let's not forget that research into vaccines (funded by the taxpayer) has been ongoing for many years with assurances that it will be ready by a certain date. The dates come and go with alarming regularity and we are now, apparently, still decades away from being able to use a vaccination for cattle - despite one being available NOW for badgers.
“Nothing would delight me more than to have an effective vaccine as part of an array of told that we can use for bovine TB and at the earliest opportunity, but the fact remains that we have this conundrum that we have, up until now, not been able to event test it in UK conditions,” said Heath. Not good enough - surely procedures should have been put in place decades ago to test the vaccine in the UK?
The chief scientific adviser, Professor Ian Boyd, said a TB eradication strategy would be published by June, “What we expect that to show is what all the methods are available for eradication, where they are going to come on line and what their contribution is going to be to the ultimate eradication of TB.
“That has to be expressed in very plain language and it has to be expressed very clearly.”
16 Mar 2013, 11:13 AM
Information sent via email from GL 16/03/13.
Cattle Vaccination is and always has been the obvious solution. It is over 100 years since cattle were first experimentally vaccinated for bovine TB. Why has it has taken so long to produce a vaccine? The Industry itself bears the blame for relying on a wasteful and gruesome, ‘test and slaughter policy’. They once claimed it would be the quickest way to clear the disease. Now they want to start killing the wildlife again. We cannot let this continue.
The average age at exit/death of a cow in the UK herd is just 6.6 years, making a vaccine even more viable. The following statement by CHAWG, (Cattle Health and Welfare Group) is quite useful.
Page 21, for example,
Quote, “240,000 cattle dying on farms of unknown causes” (BCMS) The whole annual report is full of useful information. They now admit that the breeding of cattle has concentrated on production rather than health for the last 30 yrs.
Also I think it may be possible to turn their claim (Defra) that no country has managed to control TB without first addressing the wildlife reservoir on its head. It is easier to say that, “Countries that have become obsessed with the issue of a wildlife reservoir have been the ones who have failed to eliminate bTB in cattle. Ireland for e.g. still killing 18,500 cattle in 2011 whereas Sweden and Scotland are free of TB without mass killing of wildlife.
Australia is an example they often cite and its time we hit this one on the head. Here I have noted the irrelevance of this particular idea .
Strictly speaking no actual wildlife reservoir ever existed in Australia. Feral water buffalo, (many still farmed for milk) were found with bTB in one area and these were eliminated.
Badger indigenous and wild Water buffalo feral , introduced and farmed
Australian cattle free ranging in many areas UK cattle fenced (usually inadequately)
Climate and environment. Very different
Water buffalo are cattle/bovines. Badgers are a totally different species and avoid
The will associate and free range with the cattle cattle as a rule.
They can attempt to breed with cattle Badgers do not breed with cattle!!!
Australia developed effective movement controls UK failed to control movement of cattle
14 Mar 2013, 6:42 PM
Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee
Select Committee Announcement
14 March 2013
MPs to take evidence from Minister on bovine TB vaccination
The Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee will hold its final scheduled oral evidence session on bovine TB vaccination on Tuesday 19 March at 3.00 pm. This session will explore the development of a vaccination response to the problem of bovine TB in cattle and wildlife—specifically progress with the availability of a cattle BCG vaccine, and the deployment of an injectable badger vaccine.
The Committee will also question the Minister about Schmallenberg.
The meeting will take place in committee room 15 at the Palace of Westminster.
The witnesses will be:
At 3.00 pm:
· David Heath MP, Minister for Agriculture, Defra
· Professor Ian Boyd, Chief Scientific Adviser, Defra
· Professor Glyn Hewinson, Chief Scientist, AHVLA
Further information on the inquiry is available on the Committee’s website. www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/environment-food-and-rural-affairs-committee/
9 Mar 2013, 8:27 PM
Cash support for the BCG cattle vaccine went down from £3.7 million in 2009/10 to £2.2 million last year. While it was increased by around £500,000 this year, it is due to fall again by 2015/16 to less than £2 million.
Labour's Shadow Farming Minister Huw Irranca-Davies, said: "Government cuts to funding for badger vaccinations and their dithering on cattle vaccinations means they are failing farmers and our countryside. It is as if they want to rule out all options other than this flawed cull which is bad for wildlife, bad for farmers and bad for taxpayers."
A Department for Environment spokesman said: "These figures only show funding already committed to long-term research projects over the next few years. They are likely to increase as further work is commissioned.
"Scoping of potentially significant additional research on cattle vaccination is currently in progress. Vaccination is one of our goals to help stop the spread of bovine TB, but as the EU Commission recently confirmed it could be ten years before we have a cattle vaccine we can use.
Info from: www.thisiscornwall.co.uk/Fall-funding-bovine-TB-vaccine-research-forecast/story-18332030-detail/story.html#axzz2N4gDa8EX:
On Wednesday 6 March the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee will hold the fourth evidence session of its inquiry into vaccination of badgers and cattle against bovine TB.
Details of the session are as follows:
Wednesday 6 March, 3.00 pm, Grimond Room, Portcullis House
Animal Health and Veterinary Laboratories Agency (AHVLA)
· Professor Glyn Hewinson, Chief Scientist
[This evidence was originally scheduled to take place on 12 February]
More information about the inquiry can be at www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/environment-food-and-rural-affairs-committee/inquiries/parli ament-2010/bovine-tb-vaccine/
27 Feb 2013, 12:33 PM
On the 26 February a Parliamentary session explored the extent to which current EU legislation prevents the UK using a cattle BCG vaccine and the implications if it breaches this legislation. It was also supposed to discuss the timetable and likelihood for amending EU legislation to permit the use of cattle vaccination.
Most questions were answered by an EU bureaucrat who thinks the test and cull works (there are many examples to prove it does not work, including the fairly recent one - see www.fwi.co.uk/articles/05/02/2013/137488/tb-skin-test-questioned-after-false-results.htm#.URD1fq2kidE) . He blames movement of animals in the UK and farmers not following the rules but the committee misses the latter point.
Keep watching the last bit (after BTB) as he completely undermines his case on the dangers of BCG at 1726.