United Kingdom-Foot and Mouth.

THE Government has accepted all 26 recommendations contained in Sir Iain Andersons review of the handling of the 2007 foot and mouth disease outbreak.

Farming organisations welcomed its acceptance but said improvements will only occur if government now acts on the findings.

Several pointed out that the review focused on the handling of the outbreak and not why it had occurred thought to be due to the virus escaping from a broken pipe at the governments Pirbright laboratories in Surrey.

Tim Farron, Lib Dem shadow environment secretary, claimed the governments acceptance of the 26 recommendations was a "smokescreen" to cover up its failure to accept overall responsibility for the initial outbreak.

He said: "Instead of hiding behind a smokescreen of details and recommendations, the Government should finally admit their responsibility for the 2007 foot and mouth fiasco.

"I know of hill farmers in my constituency who suffered to the tune of £10,000 as a result of the Governments incompetence but received just £800 in the way of compensation.

"What is unbelievable is that most farmers received absolutely nothing in the way of compensation from the government."

Mr Farron said in any other industry, that level of government incompetence would not be tolerated.

"Until the Government finally shoulders the blame, the farming industry should continue to remain sceptical over this Governments ability to handle any further outbreaks of foot and mouth," he said.

Peter Morris, chief executive of the National Sheep Association (NSA), said there was still incredible anger about the 2007 outbreak.

"Many sheep farming businesses have never fully recovered from the financial and emotional turmoil that they were forced to endure," he said.

The NSA was now concerned that government delivered on its promises and improves the traceability systems and the way situations and communications are handled in future.

Mr Morris said: "It is a worry that government makes such explicit references to cost and responsibility sharing in their responses to the Anderson recommendations.

"What will not be acceptable is for government to feel it has fulfilled its obligations to improve by simply passing on costs of improvement to industry and by moving itself further away from shouldering the responsibilities it has in a disease outbreak situation."

Angus Collingwood-Cameron, North East director of the Country Land and Business Association, said it was imperative that the cost of heavy handed disease control measures do not outweigh the benefits when dealing with any future disease outbreaks.

He said there had been no such consideration in 2007.

"This resulted in the North East livestock industry being crippled due to movement restrictions imposed due to a relatively minor and contained disease outbreak located hundreds of miles away," he said.

"This was picked up in the Anderson report and I am pleased that Defra has accepted the need to incorporate economic considerations in the decision making progress."

Peter Kendall, president of the National Farmers Union, said it was critically important government departments and agencies have up to date, accurate data on where animals are kept and on movements that have taken place.

The systems were not adequate in the 2001 outbreak nor in 2007.

"It is now vital that once and for all government invests in the livestock data systems to ensure this is put right," he said.

"We are already involved in discussions with Defra on this issue and will be looking for a clear strategy from, them on how they are going to deliver this in the coming months."