WILL yet more legislation on the welfare of farm animals actually achieve the desired results? ROB SIMPSON, from the NFU's regional office in York, investigates

CHOOSING which eggs to buy in your weekly shop has become quite a challenge in recent years. Free-range, barn, or "fresh" - the choice can be very confusing.

The difference, of course, lies in the production methods with free range and barn systems giving the chickens more freedom.

But there is also a difference in price. It costs the farmer up to 40 per cent more to produce free-range eggs which translates into a higher price in the shops.

There is no single ideal system of egg production - each has pros and cons. Free-range hens, for instance, have greater freedom to move about, but are more susceptible to feather pecking and disease.

Cage systems curtail the freedom of hens to roam, but provide the best protection against disease, parasites and predators.

Ultimately, it is up to the consumer to decide whether they are willing to pay extra for free range or barn eggs.

But that choice could soon be taken away.

The Government has just completed a consultation period into whether all cages should be banned in the UK.

New rules mean that traditional cages will be replaced by "enriched cages" which offer a number of welfare advantages over traditional cages.

Animal Welfare Minister Elliot Morley says he wants to scrap even enriched cages and that would signal the collapse of another UK farm sector.

Despite claims that the majority of people think laying cages should be banned, 69 per cent of eggs bought in this country are from hens in cages.

Many of the people who want to ban cages are the same people who continue to buy eggs produced using laying cages.

Would everyone in Britain be happy to pay more for their eggs, then?

The answer can be found in the pig sector.

Eleven years ago, stalls and tethers were banned in the UK pig herd. A fine thing, you may say.

But the ban cost farmers thousands of pounds to alter their systems, and when they tried to recoup those production increases from the marketplace, consumers said "No".

Consumers buying their weekly bacon have not been willing to pay that bit extra for British meat. They choose, far too often, the cheaper, foreign alternative which often comes from pigs who spend much of their lives chained to a wall or confined in a metal stall.

The result has been a massive decline in the UK pig industry. Instead of UK legislation actually improving the pigs' lot, consumers are supporting foreign farming methods which are outlawed in this country.

If consumers prefer the alternative egg production methods to the caged systems, they can pay a bit extra in the supermarket to justify that decision.

But if cages are banned by a small, but powerful, group of activists in the UK, they will be exporting another farming sector to a foreign country.

When the less-affluent consumers demand eggs at a price they can afford, the retailers will go to another country where nobody cares about the chickens' welfare.

It happened in the UK pig sector, and if we allow the Government to ban cages without putting controls on inferior imports, it will happen again.

Updated: 08:46 Tuesday, October 22, 2002