Uproar

Senior scientist attacks media on mad cow reports
Burns Night haggis hit by beef ban in Europe
EU puts damper on Burns night
British beef: Britain accused of blackmail
Farmers reject cattle passports
Hogg dismisses BSE law threat
Hogg sparks fresh row by dismissing EU legal threat
Santer: European food safety changes planned
Government accused of concealing seriousness of BSE outbreak
EU accuses Britain of beef blackmail
Britain accused of negligence in 'mad cow' crisis
Fear of eating beef
Dorrell rejects call for food agency
BSE: Brussels attacked on conduct of campaign

Senior scientist attacks media on mad cow reports

By Roger Highfield, Science Editor

Telegraph ... Thursday 23 January 1997

Britain's most senior scientist criticised the media yesterday for its erratic coverage of the mad cow epidemic and its failure to report the most pressing issue of the day - population growth.

Sir Aaron Klug, Nobel prize-winner and president of the Royal Society, said: "Popularising science is, I agree, complex and challenging. But when it comes to the science of BSE, the outcome has been unpredictable."

He made the remarks at an event organised by The Daily Telegraph, with backing from ICI and De Venoge, to celebrate an award to the Telegraph columnist, Prof Steve Jones, for his efforts to popularise science. "To the media I say: talk to scientists, ask them questions, ask for confirmation, invite them on to your programmes," said Sir Aaron. "I say also to scientists: talk to journalists, challenge their assumptions and join in the debate."

He said he had received many letters on a theory linking BSE to the use of organophosphorus pesticides - one that the media has returned to again and again, "even though there has been so little evidence to support it".

The damage caused by these pesticides "is quite unlike that caused by BSE or the new variant of CJD. "Moreover, if brain tissue of an individual poisoned by organophosphorus is compared with one infected with spongiform disease, there is another crucial difference: only the latter is infectious. This is straightforward," he said. "Why has no one from the media asked for my comments? Would the sober facts spoil the story of scientists in the dark?"

The agenda pursued by the media is another fundamental question. "One issue which should concern everyone is population growth, which in my view is the most pressing long-term problem facing the world today."

A recent meeting on the subject received no coverage. "I find it strange that the press has covered global warming in detail and yet has done little on one of the engines of global warming, population growth and the soaring demand for energy."

The event was held to celebrate the presentation of the Royal Society Michael Faraday Award to Prof Jones who has written the column View from the Lab since 1993. He teaches at University College, London.

Burns Night haggis hit by beef ban in Europe

By Auslan Cramb, Scotland Correspondent

Telegraph ... Thursday 23 January 1997

Exiled Scotsmen in Europe may have to celebrate Burns Night without the traditional haggis because of the European ban on British beef.

Every Burns Supper, held on or after January 25, opens with a haggis being piped into the room and a recitation of the bard's poem, To a Haggis.

However, Andrew Tulloch, a butcher in Paisley, Renfrewshire, has been told by the Meat and Livestock Commission that he can no longer export the product because it contains beef suet.

Mr Tulloch, 45, said yesterday: "Given all the concerns with our trade at the moment, we thought we had better do things by the book, so we contacted the commission to ask for their views.

"They came back with a firm 'no' because of the beef suet content and suggested we could get round this by using lamb suet instead. But there's no way we would consider that. The taste just wouldn't be the same.".

Alan Hughes, a bar manager who was expecting a delivery for 60 revellers at Burns Supper in the Fiddler & Firkin pub in the Hague, said he had sent two barmen to England to search for a beef-free haggis. He added that the traditional accompaniment of potatoes and turnips would not be the same without the dish - a mixture of offal and oatmeal cooked in a sheep's stomach - which was immortalised by Burns as the "great chieftain o' the puddin' race".

EU puts damper on Burns night

by Gillian Bowditch, Scotland Correspondent

The Times ... January 23 1997

Hundreds of Scottish expatriates planning Burns suppers on Saturday will be disappointed when their supply of traditional haggis fails to materialise . The "Great chieftain o' the puddin'-race" has fallen foul of European order 94/474, the ban on British beef introduced after the BSE crisis.

Haggis is traditionally made with beef suet or beef body fat . Scottish butchers are being advised that they face prosecution if they mail traditional haggis to customers on the European mainland. Burns supper clubs and St Andrew's societies in France and The Netherlands are finding supplies difficult to obtain.

Andrew Tulloch, a butcher in Paisley, Renfrewshire, who is preparing to sell up to three tonnes of haggis this weekend, was told by the Meat and Livestock Commission that he could not supply his European customers as in the past six years. "They suggested we could get round things by using lamb suet instead. There is no way we would consider that. The taste just wouldn't be the same."

Macsween, an award-winning Edinburgh haggis maker and butcher, is prepared to produce lamb haggis. "The supply is limited because it is not easy to get hold of large quantities of lamb fat. Sheep are smaller than cattle.

"The lamb-only haggis is for the export market and we will dispatch about 200lbs as far afield as Malawi and Chile over the next few days. The lamb fat gives a slightly different taste. It tends to be richer and therefore is creamier on the palate."

Alan Hughes, the manager of a British-style pub in The Hague, said: "There are 60 people due to attend on Saturday night and we have a piper, as well as a lad from Edinburgh who is booked to address the haggis. The only problem is that we have a serious haggis predicament."

British beef: Britain accused of blackmail

By Neil Buckley in Strasbourg and David Wighton and Robert Peston in London

Financial Times ... Thursday January 16 1997

Mr Jacques Santer, European Commission president, yesterday accused the UK of " threats and blackmail " in its attempts to get the global ban on British beef exports lifted.

In his strongest public criticism of Britain's handling of the beef crisis, Mr Santer said his first phone contact with Mr John Major, UK prime minister, to discuss the problem had been "rather an argument". Mr Major, he claimed, had threatened legal action against any Commission attempt to ban beef exports, even before the ban was imposed.

Mr Santer rejected allegations - in a draft report by the European Parliament's special inquiry into bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) or mad cow disease - that the Commission had put the interests of the beef industry ahead of public health.

The UK, not the Commission, he added, had put "political considerations" first, by pursuing its non-co-operation campaign with EU business to try to force a lifting of the ban before there was firm evidence British beef was safe.

"I had a lot of difficulties with the British government, I was threatened often but never did I cede," Mr Santer told the inquiry committee, which released its draft report this week. "I refused to let myself be influenced by political pressure, I refused to give in to blackmail ."

A Downing Street official said: "The prime minister has taken a firm line throughout our dealings with the commission. Our view was that the action taken in banning beef exports was unnecessary and disproportionate.

"We have not seen a transcript of Mr Santer's remarks today, but if phrases like blackmail were used we would not think them appropriate. In the main our dealings with the commission have been constructive."

Mr Santer's comments came in a week when relations between the UK and EU have again been frosty. The European Commission warned it would take Britain to court if it approved the planned alliance between British Airways and American Airlines, while the parliamentary inquiry threatened legal action against Mr Douglas Hogg, UK agriculture minister, for refusing to appear before it.

The Commission yesterday rounded on the UK for "distorting" its view of the BA-AA alliance, saying its objections were based entirely on the need to protect consumers.

But UK officials said that Mr Van Miert appeared to have misunderstood the basis on which the Department of Trade and Industry had considered the proposed deal.

The department said it was "puzzled" why Mr Van Miert had analysed the merger on the assumption the existing Bermuda 2 agreement restricting competition at Heathrow remained in place. The DTI had stressed its analysis was on the basis of complete liberalisation and scrapping of Bermuda 2.

Foreshadowing further tensions, Mr Hans Van Mierlo, Dutch foreign minister, who will play a central role in attempts to agree a new EU treaty by June's Amsterdam summit, said the EU had to escape from the "tyranny of the veto". Mr Van Mierlo insisted qualified majority voting should be extended to areas such as justice and home affairs, and, particularly, common EU foreign policy. Mr Major, however, has said Britain will not surrender its national veto.

Farmers reject cattle passports

By David Brown, Agriculture Editor

Telegraph ... Friday 17 January 1997

Proposals to win back consumer confidence in beef by keeping track of all cattle in Britain have been discounted by farmers as a "paperwork nightmare".

The rejection is a blow to Government efforts to persuade the European Union to lift its export ban on British beef on the grounds that everything possible has been done to ensure the meat is safe. Under plans announced last month by Douglas Hogg, agriculture minister, farmers would have to meet costs of up to Ł25 million a year to run a database after the Government spent Ł5 million to set it up.

But producers say they will not pay for it because it does not use enough computer technology and relies too much on paperwork and red tape including "passports" for cattle being moved. Bill Madders, a senior figure in the National Farmers' Union of England and Wales and chairman of the National Cattle Database Working Group, said: " MAFF's proposals will create a bureaucratic paper nightmare . They have suggested a paper-based system which will result in duplication and will not give the assurance needed to create consumer confidence."

He said farmers should contribute towards the cost of running a national database only if it met their requirements. Farmers' leaders want a tracing scheme introduced speedily and criticised Ministry of Agriculture suggestions that it should be phased in over a number of years.

They also want a computerised scheme, using electronic scanning devices to "read" ear-tags on animals and eliminate a mountain of paperwork. Under the plans farmers would pay an annual registration fee of Ł40 plus between Ł5 and Ł10 for every cattle passport issued.

They would also pay another 50p for each animal movement recorded on the system. The Government has asked farmers and others in the livestock industry to comment on the plans. Mr Hogg has told farmers that it is in their own best interests to "embrace the scheme wholeheartedly and reassure their customers about the quality of British beef".

He has also said the scheme would not be implemented until the EU Commission in Brussels decided the format for a European-wide livestock traceability system. Farmers' leaders in Britain argue that no common standards have yet been set for the specification of electronic scanners for livestock.

Hogg dismisses BSE law threat

By Toby Helm, EU Correspondent, in Brussels

Telegraph ... Wednesday 15 January 1997

Douglas Hogg, the Agriculture Minister, has rejected claims that he could be prosecuted for refusing to give evidence to a European Parliament inquiry into the beef crisis.

Mr Hogg said that if Euro-MPs attempted to take action against him in the European Court of Justice it would fail, as there was no legal basis for it.

Reimer Boege, a German Euro-MP who led the Parliament's investigation into the handling of the BSE crisis, threatened court action yesterday, claiming that Mr Hogg had failed to honour his legal obligations .

Mr Hogg told BBC radio that Mr Boege was wrong to suggest that he was answerable to the court. "British ministers are accountable to the House of Commons."

Several Euro-MPs on the inquiry committee had "aspirations to exercise a supervisory role over ministers of sovereign states", Mr Hogg observed. "I don't share that view."

The court threat came as the Parliament met criticism from the Government and the European Commission over its draft report, which attacks Brussels and London for mismanaging the crisis.

The report accused the Government of " blackmail " tactics in trying to get the beef ban lifted, of slackness in failing to enforce a 1988 ban on feeding meat and bone meal to ruminants and of negligence in allowing export of the banned feed.

Mr Hogg admitted that " there were things that we should have done that we did not do ", but overall the British response was "reasonable and proportionate".

ď Susannah Herbert, in Paris, writes: British animal feed - banned from France since 1989 - was entering by a "laundering circle" in Belgium and Ireland, a French MP said yesterday.

Jean-Francois Mattei, president of a parliamentary committee investigating BSE, has taken evidence from 60 people before compiling a 250-page report. He denounced British officials for lack of co-operation and European Commission officials for sticking to economic criteria alone.

Hogg sparks fresh row by dismissing EU legal threat

from Charles Bremner in Brussels and Andrew Pierce

Times ... January 15 1997

A further confrontation between the Government and the European Union was triggered yesterday by Douglas Hogg, the Agriculture Minister, when he dismissed the threat of legal action over his refusal to give evidence to a European Parliament inquiry into BSE .

Mr Hogg, in a defiant performance which cheered Tory Eurosceptics, said that European Parliament committees had no power to summon British ministers. "British ministers are accountable to the House of Commons. A number of members of the European committee have aspirations to exercise a supervisory role over the ministers of sovereign states. I don't share that view. I don't think we should encourage those aspirations."

Mr Hogg was one of a number of senior politicians and EU officials called to give evidence to the four-month inquiry last year. But twice, to the fury of the European Parliament, he refused. He sent instead Richard Packer, the Permanent Secretary at the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. Mr Packer angered the inquiry committee when he claimed that BSE had been caused " largely by an act of God ".

A draft report by the committee published yesterday was highly critical of Britain's handling of the BSE crisis. It listed 13 charges of maladministration, negligence and irresponsibility in dealing with the "mad cow" outbreak .

Reimer B–ge, chairman of the inquiry, said yesterday that Britain should be taken to the European Court over Mr Hogg's refusal to attend, which he said breached an agreement that member states' ministers should co-operate with the inquiry.

Herr B–ge added: "The legal position is clear. In domestic terms this is explosive stuff." Herr B–ge, a German MEP, repeated the challenge to Mr Hogg to face the committee. "It is quite clear that the minister has to come to a committee of inquiry if he is invited. If we let this matter pass, we will be setting a precedent for the future."

Mr Hogg's uncompromising stance won support from Tory MPs, many of whom have been criticial of his handling of the BSE crisis, and Brussels observers predicted that legal action was unlikely to materialise. They believe Mr Hogg was deliberately flexing his muscles on an issue he knew he would win.

Speaking on The World at One on BBC Radio, Mr Hogg brushed aside the legal threat. The minister, whose stance has been supported by Cabinet colleagues, said: "The question is whether a minister should be summoned by a European committee to give evidence. The clear answer to that is 'No'. There is no treaty basis for that. If they bring legal action of that kind, they will lose it."

Herr B–ge is planning to table amendments to the report outlining the options against Britain. The European Parliament will vote on the report on February 19, raising the possibility of legal action before the general election.

* A French parliamentary report has found evidence that suspect British cattle feed, made from animal parts, may have been labelled as Irish and imported into France from Belgium in the late 1980s.

The draft report of the National Assembly inquiry panel, leaked to Le Monde refers to a "laundering circuit for British bonemeal, which was systematically relabelled as coming from Ireland".

Santer: European food safety changes planned

By Caroline Southey in Brussels

Financial Times ... Wednesday January 15 1997

Mr Jacques Santer, president of the European Commission, is today expected to outline plans for radical changes in the way the EU copes with food safety in an effort to restore consumer confidence after the mad cow crisis.

Mr Santer's proposals follow the official release this week of an interim report from a European parliamentary committee that alleges the Commission sought to play down the threat of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) in an effort to lessen its impact on the beef market.

In a speech to the committee, Mr Santer is expected to outline plans to separate responsibility in the Commission for agriculture and consumer matters. He is expected to propose making one commissioner responsible for consumer affairs and food policy. At present, food and consumer safety issues are handled by four commissioners.

The result would be to put all food safety issues in the hands of Ms Emma Bonino, commissioner responsible for consumer affairs .

Mr Santer is likely to argue that reform is necessary because of public distrust of the way the EU manages food safety, and a belief that policies protect farmers at the expense of consumers.

He is expected to propose expanding the Commission's 30-strong inspection team to establish an agency on food safety, responsible for ensuring member states act on EU laws.

It would be created by and report to the Commission rather than to the agricultural directorate.

Mr Santer will stress the need for extra cash for this, which would have to be agreed by member states and the European parliament. Calls for extra staff to boost the inspection services in the early 1990s were ignored by member states.

Government accused of concealing seriousness of BSE outbreak

PA News

PA News ... Tue Jan 14

The Government deliberately distorted scientific evidence to conceal the extent and seriousness of the mad cow disease outbreak, it was claimed tonight.

Government officials and ministers also pressured the Brussels Commission to ignore any BSE-related findings during its regular inspections of British slaughterhouses, claimed the author of a damning European Parliament report into the handling of the mad cow crisis.

Spanish socialist MEP Manuel Medina Ortega, unveiling his findings at a special meeting of the parliament's BSE inquiry committee in Strasbourg, listed a catalogue of 13 charges against the Government of maladministration, negligence and irresponsibility in dealing with the mad cow scare.

BSE: Brussels attacked on conduct of campaign

By Caroline Southey and Neil Buckley in Brussels

Financial Times ... Monday December 23 1996

The European Commission sought to minimise the threat to consumers from BSE, or mad cow disease, in a way that "could be construed as misinformation", according to a draft report from a European Parliament inquiry.

Accusing the Commission of putting the interests of the farming industry ahead of consumers, the report calls for a radical overhaul of the way the European Union manages food safety and animal health. Reforms should include the creation of a "unit for public health protection" and treaty changes to ensure higher priority for consumer protection in future EU farm laws.

The British government is singled out for particular criticism for failing to take action to contain the disease. The report asserts that it failed to enforce a ban on feeding ruminants meat and bonemeal, one of the first measures taken to limit the spread of BSE. Meat and bonemeal infected with the sheep disease scrapie is considered the most likely source of BSE.

The inquiry's draft report, by Mr Manuel Medina Ortega, a Spanish MEP, is likely to be reworked before publication on January 22. It will be discussed with Mr Jacques Santer, president of the Commission, a week before release.

"The final report is likely to come out with different views. The draft does not reflect the opinions of all the committee's members," a European Union diplomat said.

Mr Medina's report says the UK was negligent on several fronts, including its failure to: neutralise the BSE or scrapie agent in feed; prevent exports of meat and bonemeal; put in place laws on cattle identification; enforce veterinary controls; and implement the selective cull of cattle agreed by EU heads of government in Florence last June.

Mr Medina also asserts that the UK was guilty of "partial reading of advice and warnings from scientists", failing to take into account the most critical views. As a result the "grave and imminent danger of possible transmission (of BSE to humans) was only taken account of on March 20 1996".

The report attacks the Commission for putting the interests of farmers and the agricultural industry before public safety. It argues that the Commission carried out a policy of "minimising the problem, which could be construed as misinformation. All this was done to avoid disturbances on the meat market".

Britain accused of negligence in 'mad cow' crisis

from Charles Bremner in Brussels

The Times ... January 10 1997

Hogg: refusal to give evidence deplored

British handling of the BSE epidemic is a long tale of negligence, according to an inquiry by the European Parliament.

In a final report to be issued next week, a parliamentary committee charges Britain with bad faith in its management of the disease since 1988. The cross-party committee, which has been hearing evidence from British and European Union officials, also accuses the Brussels Commission of failing in its duty by playing down the gravity of the epidemic and placing the farm trade above public health.

The findings of the inquiry, which is the first by the Parliament using powers it received under the Maastricht treaty, were dismissed by British officials as widely expected. The inquiry has no power to apply sanctions, but its findings are prompting anger around the Continent. Le Soir of Brussels said the report had confirmed "the incredible British lack of fair play" over the "mad cow" affair. Bad publicity over the inquiry's findings will not help Britain's drive in the coming weeks to win a partial lifting of the beef export embargo from herds certified to be BSE-free .

The inquiry's conclusions, drafted by Manuel Medina, a Spanish Socialist MEP, are to be endorsed by the 19-member committee in Strasbourg after an appearance by Jacques Santer, the Commission President, next week. The report, which may be revised before its release, stops short of recommending a no-confidence vote in the Commission.

A list of 13 alleged British failings includes the attempt to end the embargo by blocking European Union business last spring. That amounted to "an abuse of its rights and blackmailing of the Community institutions", it said. Britain had exerted pressure on the Commission over BSE for the past six years, refusing to allow veterinary inspections in the early 1990s and using British officials and scientists to swing decisions in London's favour, it said.

Since the EU's scientific committee advising on BSE had been dominated by, and usually chaired by, Britons, "it is logical to have doubts about its ... capacity to be impartial," the report said.

The big rise in the export of British animal-based feed after the national ban amounted to "a failure to comply with the principle of co-operation that must exist between all member states", it said. Britain had also refused to listen to scientists who judged the epidemic to be more serious than officially acknowledged.

The committee was scathing about British officials who appeared before it, including Sir Keith Meldrum, the Chief Veterinary Officer, and it deplored the refusal of Douglas Hogg, the Agriculture Minister, to give evidence.

The Commission's consistent policy of playing down the consequences of the epidemic "could even be interpreted at certain times as a policy of disinformation," it said.

Fear of eating beef

Robert Matthews

Telegraph ... 4 January 1997

Fears of humans being wiped out by eating meat will also feature regularly over the coming year, as scientists reveal more about the link between BSE and CJD. So far, most attention has focused on the dozen or so young people who seem to have fallen prey to a new variant of CJD, which scientists suspect is linked to eating beef. But a far more conclusive experiment is set to reach a conclusion in 1997.

At St Mary's Hospital in London, scientists have been giving regular doses of infected meat to genetically-engineered mice, specially created to have human-like brain-cells. The fate of these mice will give the strongest indication yet of the size of the risk facing those of us who ate BSE-infected meat.

Dorrell rejects call for food agency

By David Brown, Agriculture Editor

Telegraph ... Thursday 9 January 1997

Demands for an independent food agency with executive powers to protect consumers were rejected yesterday by Stephen Dorrell, Health Secretary.

He dismissed calls from Labour and the Liberal Democrats that a new agency should be set up to maintain public confidence in food. He told the Oxford Farming Conference: "I am opposed to any proposal that executive responsibility should be shifted from ministers to some executive agency. Responsibility belongs to Parliament and the Government."

He was speaking after an Oxford Union Debate where he won overwhelming support from farmers. He proposed a motion that decisions on food safety should be taken only on the basis of food science. The motion was carried by 277 votes to 155.

It was the first large gathering of farmers attended by Mr Dorrell since his announcement last March that mad cow disease might be linked to Creutzfeldt- Jakob disease in people. The announcement sparked Britain's worst beef crisis and led to the EU's export ban on British beef.

Mr Dorrell argued that he had made the announcement only after hearing the best scientific advice available. He was opposed by Sheila McKechnie, director of the Consumers' Association, who called for an independent agency that would make "transparent decisions" and provide a role for consumers to give their views.

Mrs McKechnie said she was disappointed with the vote. "I was not saying that the responsibility should be taken away from politicians," she said. "We just want to see the end of decision-making in secret in the way it has been done by the Ministry of Agriculture for many years."

EU accuses Britain of beef blackmail

By Toby Helm, EU Correspondent, in Brussels

Telegraph ... Friday 10 January 1997

Britain has been accused of consistent "negligence" over mad cow disease and of trying to "blackmail" Europe into lifting the beef ban by a damning European Parliament report.

The BSE crisis report, which will anger ministers and civil servants, also accuses Britain of packing EU committees on BSE with British officials whose "capacity to be impartial" it calls into question. Policies pursued by Britain - as well as those followed by the European Commission - failed to recognise the serious health threat for years, says the report.

In addition the Government is scolded for its "blackmail" policy of "non co-operation" over the beef ban and for refusing to carry out a selective slaughter agreed at the Florence summit in June. Douglas Hogg, Agriculture Minister, is criticised for refusing to give evidence to the EU parliament's investigation into BSE.

The report, written by Manuel Medina Ortega, the Spanish MEP, is so outspokenly anti-British that EU officials believe it will have to be toned down before final publication next month. At one point, it suggests British officials are, by definition, incapable of impartiality. Referring to a "massive" British presence on committees, it says: "It is necessary to point out the BSE sub-group of the standing veterinary committee has almost always been chaired by a British person, so it is logical to have doubts about their powers of arbitration and capacity to be impartial."

Several areas are listed where the British have shown "negligence" and have applied undue "pressure" which prevented the necessary policies being adopted. They include:

ď Failure to enforce a 1989 ban on feeding meat and bone meal to ruminants. "Lack of control measures made it possible for feed stored with ruminant protein to continue to be illegally administered to ruminants."

ď Failure to prevent export of feed banned in Britain. The "justification" for exporting banned feed given by Keith Meldrum, chief veterinary officer, (Mr Meldrum argued that letters warning other countries had been sent out) was "not acceptable".

ď Pressuring Brussels by packing committees full of British officials. "Adding to the pressure through the significant numerical presence of British civil servants and scientists who acted more or less in the sphere and under the control of the Ministry of Agriculture."

ď Failing to read the advice and warnings of scientists. Blame is also heaped on the Commission. Opinions of criticising scientists were not taken into account.

ď Trying to "blackmail" the EU into lifting the beef ban by adopting the non co-operation policy.

Such criticisms follow a row in October between John Major and Dr Klaus Hansch, German president of the European Parliament, who accused Britain of "blackmail tactics".

At an EU meeting in Dublin, Mr Major rounded on Dr Hansch saying he did not understand the first thing about British policy on BSE. Mr Major told him his comments were "deeply offensive".

The 18 Euro-MPs who have sat on the inquiry committee will consider the draft report in Strasbourg on Monday. Britain's two members, Lord Plumb, leader of the Tory Euro-MPs, and Phillip Whitehead, a Labour Euro-MP, are expected to argue for milder language.

It concludes that the BSE crisis did not result from a lack of "legislative measures" by Britain but from the Government's attitude "which has not guaranteed their correct application or carried out the necessary checks".

A spokesman for the Ministry of Agriculture said it had not yet received the draft. "We believe it contains some factual errors which we hope will be corrected when the final report is drafted."