Between the lines: Foot-and-mouth fear founded on public ignorance

First the good news:

The foot-and-mouth disease outbreak in Britain, and now France and Holland, is not a new or different threat for New Zealand.

The bad news:

Few people seem to know this or believe it when they are told.

They ignore the vast and closer regions of Asia and Africa, where the disease is ever-present.

They seem unaware that South Africa has experienced a foot-and-mouth outbreak of the same serious proportions as the UK over eight months, and that it is still going on.

They ignore the high level of trade and many visitors from regions where people are less likely to be aware of the endemic disease because it receives little publicity, have little understanding of what a disaster foot-and-mouth would be for New Zealand, and be more likely to have language difficulties which make it hard to explain why it would be a problem here.

Adding to the risk is that visitors from Asia, particularly, often bring in food, according to border control officials.

And it is worth noting that it is food which poses the greatest risk - not the shoes of tourists who before leaving home had never ventured out of downtown Hong Kong or London.

Since the outbreak in Europe, people travelling from there face the more stringent border checks previously reserved for visitors from areas where foot-and-mouth is endemic.

These facts have been repeatedly spelled out in recent weeks, but have done little to calm fears heightened by the UK crisis.

There seems little explanation for the stubbornly blinkered view that what happens in Britain is more important than elsewhere.

Only that the colonial cringe is clearly alive and well in this former far-flung corner of the British Empire.

The good thing to come from this obsession, however, is that New Zealanders' minds are focused, for the first time in far too long, on the economic importance of agriculture, and the overwhelming need to ensure its security for the good of everybody.

It is unfortunate, though, that a consequence of this reacquaintance with the realities of our economy has come down to criticism of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry for its perceived shortcomings.

Where was the concern for MAF's ability to deal with such threats when it was restructured eight times in the last decade, when its staff were cut from 6500 to a thousand, when an accountancy error not of its making cut its budget by around $2 million a year for four years, leaving it significantly under-resourced?

How many people offered submissions on a review of MAF when its biosecurity functions were reviewed in 1997?

Epidemiologist Professor Roger Morris, of Massey University, says Massey's world-leading epidemic-tracking software, EpiMAN, exists only because of the vision of one man at MAF, Herman Liberona, who championed the work.

EpiMAN, hurriedly set up in Britain last month, is a vital component of New Zealand's emergency response systems, but since the initial development Professor Morris has had to scrounge money from overseas to keep the project going.

Recently, the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment, Dr Morgan Williams, reviewed the management of New Zealand's biosecurity and found it good but wanting in key areas

He stressed that biosecurity needed to take the same priority as national security.

The public outcry over foot-and-mouth suggests that many New Zealanders agree.

Now they need to walk the talk.

Herald Online feature: Foot-and-mouth disaster

UK outbreak map

World organisation for animal health

UK Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food

The European Commission for the Control of Foot-and-Mouth Disease

Pig Health/Foot and Mouth feature

Virus databases online