Foot and Mouth Disease Four Years On


Press Release on pig swill-feeding

Boris Johnson MP backs calls for Swill-feeder compensation

Boris Johnson MP, co-hosting a Country Land and Business Association sponsored video screening and discussion with George Howarth MP, last week denounced the Government’s handling of the 2001 Foot and Mouth crisis and the subsequent ban on swill-feeding. Mr Johnson branded this ban a ‘knee-jerk’ reaction designed to divert and distract attention away from the Government.

“The whole of a British industry was destroyed at the stroke of a bureaucrat’s pen. These people had their livelihoods snatched from them by a Government which had, up until a few months before the outbreak, been actively encouraging them to invest in MAFF approved swill processing equipment.

“This ban was the result of one farmer’s illegal swill-feeding practices, practices which the Government well knew about. Had the Government acted as it was obliged to under existing legislation, as set out by the Animal By Products Order 1999, then this horrendous episode would never have happened. Instead, our landfill sites pile ever ominously higher, our sewers clog ever thicker and ex swill-feeders such as my constituent Mick Eadle, victimized by a Government desperate to tar anyone and everyone but itself, have lost everything. At the very least I strongly believe the Government has a moral duty to compensate these people”.

20 thoughts on “Foot and Mouth Disease Four Years On”

  1. [Ed: for ref. initial posting was “press release on pig swill coming soon”]

    Can’t wait. I clap my hands together in excitement and giggle.

  2. Simon

    >First, a man-made virus has no business in pigs — did the virus get there naturally, or was it a lab accident? More frighteningly, but less likely, was it bioterrorism?


  3. I fail to connect that poster with your statement of supposed anti semitism . The three manacled mannikins, shown cowering before the supposed Beast of Europe, are merely our own
    Three Tenors:- Tony; Michael, and Charles. One of these happens to be Jewish: so what? The other two are Scottish: does this mean the message is also anti Celt? The other three tenors are also disparate in origin, does that make their singing any less spellbinding?
    The chances of this splinter group making any real progress with the average , intelligent British voter, is zilch.

  4. Quite so. Monkey, where is this anti-semitism of which you speak? Or are you being satirical, in which case, be funnier.

    Still, re: UKIP, you’ve got to respect a party that can complain about being shackled by human rights while the rest of the country complains about having theirs taken away. Shows that they’re not afraid to be utterly wide of the mark.

  5. Scary duck, you obviously haven’t researched your historic poster campaigns: yours reproduced , almost exactly, a Conservative poster from wayback then. Not that the average guy would disagree with the sentiment. He does favour, when all is said and done , a racoon: an urban scavenger: the Robin Hood of the animal world. A robber of Peter who gave to Paul. Incidentally , the name Robin Hood, in up to date terms , would be ” Red Hat,” What price his green credentials?

  6. whew….didnt realise such a high standard was demanded from campaign posters and here I was blithely offering my poster painting skills yesterday.
    I reckon you should take some pots of paint to the local nursery and see what the kiddies come up with.

  7. Personally I like the “Backing Blair” posters over at backingblair dot co dot uk

  8. Send them a couple of hundred pounds and they will parade around London with the posters on the side of a truck or something, spewing out a suitably orwellian message over tannoy. Seems like a good investment to me.

  9. When I first read the heading “Pigswill”, I was misguided enough to read into it rather more than was your intention. I thought it was shorthand for Labour spin and misinformation.
    It describes , exactly, the content of much of Labour’s press releases, and even more exactly, that of the many attempts to hoodwink the great British public. They have made unrealistic promises( whilst permanently failing to deliver) of Nirvana under the parasol of New Labour’s ‘perfect’ stewardship ,( at great public expense). Decisions are never made; rather another public liability, in form of a committee, is instituted( my theory is that there is an ever expanding band of committee members, increasingly unable to attain unanimity, on anything: thereby eternally damned to sit in committee forever)
    On Radio 4,this lunchtime, there was a programme trying to explain the difference between wit and comedy in today’s media. Neither of these two terms should be apportioned to New Labour.They are neither witty or comical. It boils down to, ” You pay through the nose to a humourless authority, presiding over ever decreasing, but ever more expensive services , however unfunny, about which you are not consulted, but which concern very small percentages of the community: How funny is that?
    How many countries in today’s world would supply , at public expense, 20 or more translators, for the few who cannot be arsed to learn English. It is to be expected for the newly accepted immigrant, but how long are we expected to cater for the minority who refuse to even try to learn and speak the language of their bounteous host? Pigswill! Do me a favour.

  10. You don’t find the exaggerated ‘hook nosed’ caricature anti semitic? Good grief.

    As for that Boris picture, he’s got more chins than a Chinese phonebook. That jogging lark hasn’t done him much good has it?

  11. Monkey – well no. I don’t actually. That’s what cartoonists DO: exaggerate people’s features. If a chap’s got a hook nose and he goes into politics, he’s going to get that nose exaggerated. This is as silly as the Daily Mail journalist having a go at Ken Livingstone for an off-the-cuff remark.

    Besides, you wait till the cartoonists get hold of Boris’s chins…

Comments are closed.