I move that the Bill be now read a Second Time. This is an amending Bill, and consequently I cannot deal with what I might call the principles. I can only take it section by section to see what are the amendments which are proposed in this Bill. The diseases of animals legislation started in 1894, and the Principal Act is referred to in many cases. First of all, Section 5 and 6 of the Principal Act deal with a disease called cattle plague, which has not been known in this country for many years now, and Section 8 and 9 deal with pleuro-pneumonia and foot-and-mouth disease. Section 2 of this Bill will have the effect of abolishing those sections altogether, and having all the diseases dealt with under Section 10 of the Principal Act. Section 10 is of wider application and it gives the central authority more power than does any of the other sections I mentioned, that is Sections 5, 6, 8 and 9. It is proposed, therefore, to have all the diseases, cattle plague, pleuro-pneumonia and foot-and-mouth disease, dealt with under Section 10 the same as the other diseases. That is the effect of Section 2 of this Bill. Sub-section (2) of Section 2 provides that the certificate of a veterinary surgeon that the disease exists is conclusive evidence of the disease. In other words, it is not necessary that the veterinary surgeon should be examined on the subject if he has presented his certificate.
Section 3 of this Bill deals with the matter of compensation. Under the present legislation, compensation can be paid only where the animal is slaughtered as suffering from the disease, but it sometimes happens that, where an order is given, after examination, to have the cattle slaughtered, some of them die before the slaughter can take place. Strictly speaking, compensation cannot be paid in such cases, although in fact we did pay compensation in the last outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease, even though it was not strictly legal. Nobody questioned it, of course, I need hardly say. There are four sub-sections in Section 3, but they all deal with that same point. Sub-section (1) deals with cases of cattle plague. Sub-section (2) deals with cases of pleuro-pneumonia. Sub-section (3) deals with foot-and-mouth disease, and sub-section (4) with swine fever, but they all have the same effect, that is to say that, where an animal has been ordered to be slaughtered, and where it dies before there is time to slaughter it, compensation can be paid.
Section 4 deals with a penalty, that is the penalty of withholding payments where it is considered that the owner was at fault in any way. As the law stands, payments can be withheld only in respect of animals slaughtered. To bring this Bill up to date, as it were, paragraph (a) includes compensation payable under sub-section (3), that is, where the compensation is payable, even though the beast died before there was time to slaughter it, payments can be withheld. In paragraph (b), where animals are moved, say, to another district, and where they have come out of an infected district and it is thought advisable to slaughter them lest they might spread the disease in the new district, payment may be withheld as a penalty. Paragraph (c) deals with a case where animals are slaughtered because of the movement of say, hay or straw from an infected district into a clean district, or where, say, the owner of the cattle allows them to stray and it is possible that they may have come into contact with infection.
The next is Section 5. Under the present legislation, where animals are slaughtered there is power, of course, to make the necessary graves for the dead animals on the land of the person who owns the cattle, but the Minister has no power to requisition land outside that. During the last outbreak, although we did not actually come up against this particular difficulty, we were very nearly coming up against it. For instance, take the case of a man who has taken land on the 11 months' system. When the 11 months are up of course he cannot move diseased cattle because he would not be permitted to move them, but he would have no right to the land, and if the cattle were slaughtered in such circumstances it is doubtful whether, under the law as it stands, the Minister would have power to make the necessary graves for the dead cattle. That is altogether a necessary power.
Section 6 gives to the Minister power that the local authorities have already, and that is where diseased cattle are found at a fair or a market or a sale yard or any other public place, an inspector of the Minister can take those cattle away and have them isolated or slaughtered as the case may be. The local authorities have that power at the moment under the Principal Act but the Minister has not got the power and it is well that he should have it, because those diseases are mostly dealt with now by the central authority rather than by the local authority.
Section 7 deals with the question of penalties. Under the present law, the penalty must not exceed £20, or £5 per head, whichever is the less. If there are three cattle, for instance, the penalty cannot be more than £15. That is, of course, the court penalty, apart from the penalty of withholding payment, which the Minister has in his own hands. The court penalty cannot exceed £20, or £5 per head. The law is being changed there to a penalty of £100, and the necessary repeals of the original Act are being made.
Section 8 deals with compensation under Section 5, where land is taken on another person's holding for the burial of animals, or under Section 6, where a yard or buildings are taken to isolate or keep cattle other than those of the owner of the place. This section provides for the compensation payable to the owner of the land or premises, as the case may be.
Section 9 deals with the question of court fines. As the law now stands, these fines go into the Cattle Diseases Fund. That was quite fair and just in the Act of 1894, as it was contemplated under that Act that the local authority would deal with these diseases and, therefore, the fines would go into the Cattle Diseases Fund, which goes to the local authorities eventually in dealing with disease. These diseases, such as the foot-and-mouth disease, swine fever or — if there ever were an attack —pleuro-pneumonia, would now be dealt with by the central authority and, therefore, it is only right that any fines or penalties would go into the Central Fund rather than into the Cattle Diseases Fund.
As I explained under Section 2, Sections 5 and 6, 8, 9 and 12, of the Principal Act are repealed, 5, 6, 8 and 9 being no longer necessary, as the cases will be dealt with under Section 10.
I know that Deputies have a strong objection to what is known as legislation by reference. I can see the point in that, as when I was in opposition myself and took an interest in a Bill of this kind, it needed a great deal of research and trouble to go back over all these Acts to find out the references. I would like very much to bring these Acts up to date. This, certainly, is one of the codes which should be brought up to date by an Act simplifying or codifying all the legislation on the diseases of animals. I feel, however, that the report to be presented by the Post-war Emergency Committee, dealing with veterinary services and the diseases of animals in general, will make further legislation necessary when it has been fully considered. On that occasion, I hope to introduce a new Act to bring the whole legislation up to date and, at the same time, repeal all the old Acts.
