I move amendment No. 2:—
Before Section 4 to insert a new section as follows:—
The power vested in the Minister by virtue of sub-section (7) of Section 20 of the Principal Act to withhold, either wholly or partially, compensation or other payment shall
(a) extend to animals which have been directed to be slaughtered under the Principal Act and have been valued for that purpose but die before they can be slaughtered, and
(b) be exercisable in relation to an animal slaughtered or directed to be slaughtered whether such animal was or was not diseased, and
(c) be exercisable in relation to an animal slaughtered or directed to be slaughtered (in addition to the cases mentioned in the said sub-section) where the Minister is of opinion that the owner or person in charge of such animal did not take, in relation to the relevant outbreak of disease, adequate precautions to prevent the spread of disease, and
(d) extend to every case in which compensation could be paid by virtue of Section 3 of this Act in respect of a carcase (whether diseased or not diseased) where the Minister is of opinion that the owner or person in charge of the carcase has been guilty, in relation to the carcase, of an offence against the Principal Act or any Act amending that Act or did not take, in relation to the relevant outbreak of disease, adequate precautions to prevent the spread of disease.
This proposed new section is to replace the present Section 4. There is not very much difference until we come to paragraph (d). Paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) are practically the same as in the original section. Paragraph (d) is additional to Section 4 in the Bill as introduced. Part of that paragraph is necessary in view of the amendment we have just passed because logically we must cover the case of carcases. The difference between this proposed new Section 4 and the Principal Act is that in the Principal Act compensation could be withheld in relation to slaughtered animals. The effective words in the Principal Act are contained in Section 20, sub-section (7), which give the Minister or the local authority power to withhold compensation where, in the judgment of the board— that is the Board of Agriculture—or the local authority, as the case may be, a person has been guilty "in relation to the animal" of an offence against the Act. We want to alter those words "in relation to the animal". As a matter of fact that is the whole point of this amendment. We are changing that to the words "in relation to the outbreak". There is no reason why a man should get compensation because he could say "in relation to the animal I was careful but not in relation to the outbreak." For instance, there could be negligence —as we had in the last outbreak—in connection with the removal of farmyard manure from the city to the country or in relation to the removal of hay or straw. That is not in relation to the animal but it is in relation to the outbreak. The whole purpose of this amendment is to make it in relation to the outbreak rather than in relation to the animal and we can withhold compensation if the person has been negligent in any way in relation to the outbreak.