CRIMINOLOGY

Criminology: White Collar and Political Crimes

Criminology: White Collar and Political Crimes

In recent years, farming has undergone changes that have transformed its day-to-day work. A common perception was that larger farms had been more successful in adapting than smaller family-run farms. Certain types of farming (such as dairy farming) have become less profitable, leading to changes in the composition of farms. Interviewees repeatedly spoke of an intensification of farming practices in response to falling returns, and the diminished sense of control they exercised over their work. Partly in response to farming's reduced profitability, a number of the farms studied had expanded into diversification activities. Mechanisation has qualitatively transformed farmers' day-to-day work, as has the growing regulation of the industry.

Stress was not always framed in health terms, and was sometimes regarded as a positive or constant force, motivating people to devise solutions to problems and providing stimulation. Nor did stress have a universal meaning; some avoided the term altogether, or preferred to talk about frustration, anxiety or worry. Work-related aspects of stress in farming emerged as important, and applied to interviewees in a range of roles. These included: potentially dangerous farming practices; workload and organisation; the work activities related to particular types of farming and their busy periods (such as lambing and silage-making); rising paperwork demands; and tensions associated with family farms and acquisition. Of these, psychosocial hazards assumed particular significance: the aspects of work concerned with its organisation or management that were potentially harmful to farming communities; paperwork was the most commonly-cited cause of stress. Recent years have seen major organisational and policy changes in the agricultural sector, which have transformed the character of the work performed by farming communities. There was widespread criticism of the Government's refusal to consider a policy of vaccination, in preference for slaughter. Supporters of vaccination argued that this policy had been successfully used in Europe, to a point where further vaccination had become unnecessary. Many calls were made either for universal vaccination or for the vaccination of animals surrounding outbreaks, to act as a "firebreak". From the animal welfare perspective, many objected to the preventative slaughter of uninfected animals - a feeling amplified by the horrors of the disposal problem.

The Government and its scientists rejected vaccination, however, warning that vaccinated animals could still act as vectors for the disease. On the economic front, it was also argued that the UK's capacity to export would be severely damaged by failing to stamp out FMD as quickly as possible through slaughter.

Other biosecurity measures taken were highly unpopular. "Standstills" imposed on farms and surrounding areas (including footpaths) and the perception of infection had a devastating effect on the rural economy. The disposal of dead animals became a serious problem, with massive burial pits and pyres a common sight across the country, raising environmental concerns about air and water pollution.

Other criticisms levelled at MAFF included bringing the Army in too late; giving false information about the state of affairs; adopting a confrontational attitude towards the farming ...