Live export is going too far
COUNTRY people know that we’ve always transported live animals, from farm to market, from market to abattoir and from Scotland to England. When there was no refrigeration, animals had to be slaughtered as close as possible to the point of sale and, after all, it’s not that long since the local butcher bought at auction and then brought live animals home to be killed at the back of his village shop. Easier transport, economies of scale and tougher safety standards have reduced the number of slaughterhouses and increased the miles that animals have to travel, but haulage itself isn’t something new.
However, our attitudes to it have changed. Rightly, the EU has introduced increased restrictions and regulation. We do not allow animals to be carried long distances without a break; we insist on proper food and water; and we ensure that they are carried in correctly adapted, ventilated vehicles with trained handlers and that they are made as comfortable as possible.
The UK has been a leader in this and nowhere is there greater public concern about the issue, so much so that one of the professed advantages of our leaving the EU is that we could now insist on higher standards than the rest of Europe has, so far, been prepared to accept.
In the meantime, the numbers are growing significantly. Exports from EU to non-eu countries have increased by more than 50% since 2012. Turkey, in particular, is an important destination and entrepôt for the rest of the Middle East. These markets serve people whose religious tenets demand that animals are killed in particular ways. They recognise that halal and kosher slaughter is widely available and properly certified in northern Europe, but they often prefer to import live to their own abattoirs. It’s this growing trade that is of concern, as the distances involved are considerable.
The UK’S live exports have tripled in value since 2012 to £21 million a year. That’s an important contribution to a hard-pressed industry, but it’s small in the context of the nearly £900 million from total exports of processed beef and lamb. It’s also a fractional amount when set against the £3.5 billion total from EU live-animal exports.
Set against these figures, the regulations are simply not working. This is not just because exporters are avoiding the rules—it’s a function of long journeys. We have grown used to the rapid transit across national boundaries in the EU and forget that, as a matter of course, livestock lorries are held up for days on the borders of countries like Turkey. Security considerations are making such delays ever more likely and Brexit could increase this risk. Investigators have highlighted the health issues involved, particularly the high temperatures at borders.
There are huge distances within the EU, but even when a lorry gets to the Turkish border, it isn’t the end of the journey; many loads are carried on deep into the Middle East. It’s then the best part of 1,000 miles to adjacent countries and there’s little evidence of controls once operators are outside the EU. Even inside it, the EU Health and Food Safety Commissioner, Vytenis Andriukaitis, has made it clear that the issue is not the regulations, but their enforcement, the degree of control exercised by authorities and operator education.
All this ought to challenge the UK Government, which is committed to a tougher regime. If we can’t get an effective system when inside the EU, we won’t have a hope outside. Does Brexit mean we should think about banning journeys of more than 800 miles?
‘If we can’t get an effective system from inside the EU, we won’t have a hope outside