GOVERNMENT vets are to be given tough new powers to slaughter animals suspected of having disease.

Ministers have drawn up new laws, after claiming court action by Thirsk farmers to try to block slaughter of their herds earlier this year helped spread foot and mouth.

Farming Minister Elliot Morley said a number of farmers took the Government to court in an effort to stop vets from carrying out culls. The new powers, which are included in the Animal Health (Amendment) Bill and apply to all animal diseases, mean court orders to enter land and carry out slaughters are unnecessary.

It is these court orders which have been challenged by farmers - with more than 100 court cases taking place nationally.

East Yorkshire pig farmer John Rowbottom welcomed the new laws. He said: "We are all aware that, at this time, civil liberties are being eroded faster than ever before, but it seems that it is always for a good reason.

"For one reason or another, our rights, established over many years, are being eroded. It is unfortunate, but it is necessary.

"I was unsympathetic to some of the farmers who decided to delay things by taking court action. I know they were under enormous pressure, but the culls were for the greater good of all farmers."

Mr Morley said: "In the Thirsk outbreak, a solicitor's firm (believed not to be local) was writing to every single farm in Thirsk encouraging them to take action in terms of stopping the contiguous cull."

The firm is though to be based in south west England.

He said a "high proportion" of the farms disputing the need for a contiguous cull suffered outbreaks of the disease while the court action was taking place.

"We must not be prevented from taking effective action to stamp out the disease because we lack a key power," he said.

The Bill, due to become law next year, also gives ministers the power to reduce the level of compensation paid to farmers with "poor biosecurity" arrangements - measures aimed at stopping disease from spreading.

They will get only 75 per cent of the money they would normally receive. Mr Morley said: "The vast majority of farmers behave responsibly and they will stand to receive compensation as before.

"Where there is clear evidence - on infected premises only - that a farmer has acted in such a way as to create the risk of spreading the disease, we will have powers to pay only 75 per cent of the maximum amount."

But Mr Rowbottom said: "The Government is always very keen to use sticks rather than carrots.

"Why not give a ten per cent bonus to those doing it well?"

Updated: 11:32 Thursday, November 01, 2001