Volume 5: Animal Health, 1989-96
5. Cattle-tracking
Postscript - developments after March 1996

5.154 Although it falls outside the period of the terms of reference of our Inquiry, we believe that it is helpful briefly to follow through the story of the Government's consideration of the merits of a computerised cattle-tracking system.

5.155 The Government introduced a cattle passport system in July 1996. Under this system, the movements of all cattle born in or imported to Great Britain have to be recorded throughout its lifetime on an official passport issued for each animal. ¹

5.156 In October 1996 the Animal Health (Disease Control) Division completed a paper entitled 'Business Case for the Cattle Traceability System'. The paper explained why a cattle-tracing system was now necessary:

The crisis in confidence in the beef market has led to calls for the establishment of a computerised Cattle Traceability System (CTS) in Great Britain. At the Florence Summit in June 1996, the UK and other EU Member States reached agreement on the preconditions for the re-establishment of UK beef and beef product exports. One of these preconditions was that the UK should introduce 'an effective animal identification and movement recording system with official registration'. ²

5.157 Under the heading, 'Should we proceed with a CTS?', the paper suggested:

Those interviewed in connection with this Business Case believe unanimously that a CTS should be introduced quickly. The first major benefit would be the resumption of beef exports and the restoration of consumer confidence in the beef market. The CTS is in practice a necessary condition for these, even if this is not explicitly stated in the Florence agreement. A second benefit is fulfilment of EU requirements which are expected to be enacted into EU legislation. There are also a series of other benefits, such as improved disease control, aid to enforcement, easier production of replacement cattle passports, easier export certification etc.

We were able to find some clear, but limited, monetary benefits to Government from improved disease tracing and collection of Agricultural census data. However, on their own, these do not appear to be of sufficient value to justify the project. This explains why, before the difficulties over BSE this year, the CTS has not appeared an attractive proposition. What brings in the benefits is the restoration of the beef market.

. . .

In summary, we have here a high risk project, with the possibility of substantial positive net present value if it is successful, but substantial net present cost if it fails. But in our view, there really is no alternative to the CTS if we want to resume beef exports to a significant extent, and rebuild confidence in the domestic beef market. Thus in our judgement, the project should proceed. ³

5.158 MAFF obtained Treasury approval to move ahead with the implementation of a computerised database. At this stage it was envisaged that a single private sector provider would be contracted to implement and maintain the database. Detailed planning work began in May 1997, and it was decided not to contract out the proposed service, but to establish it as a distinct operational unit within MAFF. In February 1998 the Government announced that it would meet the costs of setting up the Cattle Traceability System and running it for the first year. ⁴

5.159 CTS was established in September 1998, and is operated by the British Cattle Movement Service. As at 22 July 1999, it was estimated that the database would not be fully complete until the end of the year 2000. At that stage, it held records for about 5.5 million cattle born or imported into the UK since 1 July 1996. In July 1999, the Government also announced that it planned to introduce charges for cattle passports, so that the running costs of the CTS were transferred from Government to the industry. ⁵