>>Prof John Oxford told The Daily Telegraph that the Merial lab was the probable source of the leak.<<
Seems as though Prof Oxford was wrong -
Five breaches at farm disease lab
There were at least five breaches of bio-security at a lab connected with July's foot-and-mouth disease outbreak, the BBC has learned.
The breaches at the Institute for Animal Health at Pirbright, four miles from where the disease was found, are shown in two reports due on Friday.
They include a leaking pipe; drains inadequate for floodwater; and failures in monitoring people and vehicles.
The Institute shares the Pirbright site with the Merial animal vaccine company.
The BBC understands that the reports, one by the Health and Safety Executive and the other by Professor Brian Spratt of Imperial College, include photographs of the pipe showing clear signs of damage from tree roots and of some joints being misaligned.
The investigators reportedly found records indicating that for several years there had been concerns about the state of the pipe, but that no repairs were carried out, possibly because funds were not made available.
The BBC understands investigators have not identified a single point of failure allowing the foot-and-mouth virus to escape, but they have outlined a scenario for what they believe happened:
The virus was present in the pipe, which is allowed under current rules governing animal viruses. The pipe links Merial to a treatment plant run by the Institute.
It was then flushed out of it during flooding at the site on 20 July.
Vehicles used by contractors then drove into the flooded area allowing the virus to be picked up on the tyres or chassis.
Those vehicles then left the site and travelled several miles to a road called Westward Lane which was also flooded, and there the waters washed the virus off the vehicles and into fields nearby where the cattle became infected.
It is expected that ministers will announce a series of measures in response to these findings.
A review will assess whether animal viruses should be handled as strictly as human viruses.
Emergency work will be carried out on the drains - the damaged pipe is already being re-lined. And there will be tighter controls on movements at the site.
Sources say the reports in no way suggest any negligence at the site, but the conclusions will prove highly embarrassing.
According to BBC environment correspondent, David Shukman, they raise highly awkward questions about the management of the site in Surrey.
The shadow environment secretary, Peter Ainsworth, told Radio 4's Farming Today that it is the government which is ultimately responsible for what happened.
He said: "I think it is profoundly shocking and will cause enormous anger in the farming community and the countryside generally that a site licensed by and monitored by the government can have been responsible for a leak of foot-and-mouth.
"I mean [it] absolutely beggars belief and enormous lessons will have to be learnt from this."
The President of the National Farmers Union, Peter Kendall, said he was shocked that such a high-risk environment could have been allowed to get into a state of disrepair.
He told Radio Five Live: "If it is five breaches of bio-security the industry will be horrified and outraged.
"To have such a virulent virus being worked on in a high-risk establishment, and then find there is serious dilapidation in the infrastructure, will leave an industry that is very cross and very concerned."
Dr Julian Hiscox, a biosecurity expert and senior lecturer in virology at Leeds University, told the BBC that there did need to be some changes at the site.
He said: "What we need to be looking at now is inspecting the infrastructure. These are, as the report suggests, very old buildings.
"They are decades old and I think we have to look at a programme of renewal which indeed is going on in the Purbright complex."
In the outbreak, hundreds of animals were culled and livestock movements were restricted around Britain.
The outbreak cost farmers millions of pounds and although the authorities were widely praised for their actions in containing it, they face heavy criticism for their handling of a facility that apparently allowed the virus to escape in the first place... |
