Difference between revisions of "Donald Curry"
Mary Spowart (talk | contribs) |
Mary Spowart (talk | contribs) m |
||
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
and Livestock Commission]],(MLC) | and Livestock Commission]],(MLC) | ||
The MLC’s ‘paramount duty is to promote greater efficiency in | The MLC’s ‘paramount duty is to promote greater efficiency in | ||
| − | the livestock industry and the livestock products industry’. | + | the livestock industry and the livestock products industry’. {Ref|1}} |
| − | Following its line of duty, the MLC was criticised during the BSE crisis for issuing ‘statements which were not scientifically correct’ and for falling ‘short of the objectivity that should have been shown by a statutory body with a duty to have regard to the interests of the consumer’.{{ Ref 2}} | + | Following its line of duty, the MLC was criticised during the BSE crisis for issuing ‘statements which were not scientifically correct’ and for falling ‘short of the objectivity that should have been shown by a statutory body with a duty to have regard to the interests of the consumer’.{{Ref|2}} |
There are two other links of interest with Curry and the MLC. There has also been a close relationship between the MLC and [[Food From Britain]], another quasi-governmental agency whose primary aim is to export as much food as possible from the UK. It is an organisation | There are two other links of interest with Curry and the MLC. There has also been a close relationship between the MLC and [[Food From Britain]], another quasi-governmental agency whose primary aim is to export as much food as possible from the UK. It is an organisation | ||
| Line 45: | Line 45: | ||
When the report was published in January 2002 it conatined over 100 | When the report was published in January 2002 it conatined over 100 | ||
recommendations the central theme of the report reflected the objectives of the Commission: reconnection. Reconnecting farmers with their market and the rest of the food chain; | recommendations the central theme of the report reflected the objectives of the Commission: reconnection. Reconnecting farmers with their market and the rest of the food chain; | ||
| − | Reconnecting the food chain with a healthy and attractive countryside; Reconnecting consumers with what they eat and where it has come from. {{ | + | Reconnecting the food chain with a healthy and attractive countryside; Reconnecting consumers with what they eat and where it has come from. {{Ref|3}} |
It was welcomed by many in the local food movement that finally thought here was a reportthat talked about many of the issues local food groups had long espoused. It also raised the idea of an alternative to the big food and supermarket system. ‘The immediate aftermath of FMD and Curry report did raise the awareness of local food as being a significant alternative strategy for the whole food system in the UK,’ argues [[Charles Couzens]], a leading local food | It was welcomed by many in the local food movement that finally thought here was a reportthat talked about many of the issues local food groups had long espoused. It also raised the idea of an alternative to the big food and supermarket system. ‘The immediate aftermath of FMD and Curry report did raise the awareness of local food as being a significant alternative strategy for the whole food system in the UK,’ argues [[Charles Couzens]], a leading local food | ||
| Line 51: | Line 51: | ||
The job of implementing Curry’s recommendations – called the Implementation Group was also given to an organisation that was headed by Curry. ‘I am very glad that Don Curry himself agreed to chair this group of distinguished outsiders,’ wrote [[Tony Blair]]. Also in response, in the 2002 Spending Review, the government promised ‘investment totalling over £500 million over three years will be available to support the key recommendations of the | The job of implementing Curry’s recommendations – called the Implementation Group was also given to an organisation that was headed by Curry. ‘I am very glad that Don Curry himself agreed to chair this group of distinguished outsiders,’ wrote [[Tony Blair]]. Also in response, in the 2002 Spending Review, the government promised ‘investment totalling over £500 million over three years will be available to support the key recommendations of the | ||
| − | Policy Commission chaired by Sir Don Curry, and to improve animal health and welfare.’{{Ref 4}} | + | Policy Commission chaired by Sir Don Curry, and to improve animal health and welfare.’{{Ref|4}} |
Since then millions has been poured into British agriculture. But why nearly four years later is Curry still talking about the need for reconnection? And what about a fair return for farmers, a central theme of the Curry Commission | Since then millions has been poured into British agriculture. But why nearly four years later is Curry still talking about the need for reconnection? And what about a fair return for farmers, a central theme of the Curry Commission | ||
| Line 58: | Line 58: | ||
| − | #{{Note 1}} http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/ws/s487.pdf | + | #{{Note|1}} http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/ws/s487.pdf |
| − | #{{Note 2}}Phillips, Lord, Bridgeman, J and Ferguson-Smith, Professor M (2000) The BSE Inquiry Report. Evidence and | + | #{{Note|2}}Phillips, Lord, Bridgeman, J and Ferguson-Smith, Professor M (2000) The BSE Inquiry Report. Evidence and |
Supporting Papers of the Inquiry into the Emergence and Identification of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy | Supporting Papers of the Inquiry into the Emergence and Identification of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy | ||
(BSE) and Variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease (vCJD) and the Action Taken in Response to it up to 20 March | (BSE) and Variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease (vCJD) and the Action Taken in Response to it up to 20 March | ||
1996, The Stationery Office, London, October, Vol. One P159; Vol. 6, p 647. | 1996, The Stationery Office, London, October, Vol. One P159; Vol. 6, p 647. | ||
| − | #{{ | + | #{{Note|3}}http://www.cabinet-office.gov.uk/farming/pdf/pr.doc. |
| − | #{{ Note | + | #{{Note|4}}http://www.defra.gov.uk/news/2002/020719c.htm. |
Revision as of 08:08, 29 August 2007
Sir Donald Curry KB, CBE, FRAgS
Donald Thomas Younger Curry is married with three children.
He chaired the Policy Commission on the Future of Farming and Food which reported to Government in January 2002. The report 'Farming and Food, a sustainable future' was widely endorsed by both Government and stakeholders and is regarded as providing an important new vision for the farming and food industry. Government policy is now based on the reports recommendations and he is currently Chairing a Delivery Group with responsibility for driving forward the Government's Sustainable Farming and Food Strategy.
He is Chairman of the NFU Mutual Insurance Company having been appointed a non-executive director in 1998, Deputy Chairman in June 2000 and Chairman in June 2003. In January 2000 he was appointed as a Crown Estate Commissioner and was re-appointed in 2004 for a further term.
He was first appointed an MLC Commissioner in October 1986 and Chaired the Commission from September 1993 until April 2001.
He was a founder, and is Chair of 'At Home in the Community', a charity providing care in the North East for people with learning disabilities.
He was awarded a CBE for his services to Agriculture in the 1997 New Year’s Honours list and a Knighthood in the Birthday Honours in 2001.
In December 2000 he was the first recipient of The Royal Smithfield Club's Bicentenary Trophy awarded for his major contribution to the British meat industry and in June 2004 he was awarded The Royal Agricultural Society's National Agricultural Award.
In 2004 he was also awarded an honorary degree (BSc) by Cranfield University and in 2005 was also awarded an Honorary Doctorate by the University of Gloucestershire.
He farms 250 acres in Northumberland comprising arable and lowland grass.
Sir Donald Curry has been an integral part of the British farming establishment for years, with a long history with the [[Meat
and Livestock Commission]],(MLC)
The MLC’s ‘paramount duty is to promote greater efficiency in
the livestock industry and the livestock products industry’. {Ref|1}}
Following its line of duty, the MLC was criticised during the BSE crisis for issuing ‘statements which were not scientifically correct’ and for falling ‘short of the objectivity that should have been shown by a statutory body with a duty to have regard to the interests of the consumer’.[1]
There are two other links of interest with Curry and the MLC. There has also been a close relationship between the MLC and Food From Britain, another quasi-governmental agency whose primary aim is to export as much food as possible from the UK. It is an organisation that would later benefit from the Curry Commission. Curry’s predecessor as chairman of the MLC, Geoffrey John, moved to become chairman of Food From Britain in 19934. Curry was appointed to the Council of Food From Britain for three years in 1994, staying for at least six years. Here was a man who believed in the neo-liberal model of low cost competing internationally.
From the late nineties, Curry had been appointed as a director of NFU Mutual, the powerful insurance company that links into the NFU. He is now the non-executive Chairman of the NFU Mutual Insurance Company. The link between NFU Mutual and the National Farmers Union (NFU) runs more deeply than many people think, with the two organisations closely intertwined. They even run joint companies together.
The Curry Commission
So Curry was not just a government-insider, he was an NFU insider, but he would lead an ‘independent’ commission. In August 2001, the ‘Policy Commission On The Future Of Farming And Food’ was announced, headed by Curry. It became known as the Curry Commission. It was meant to be the biggest revamp of agricultural policy since the War. The committee’s remit was, in part, to ‘advise the Government on how we can create a sustainable, competitive and diverse farming and food sector.’
The Commission identified that the ‘key objective of public policy should be to reconnect our food and farming industry; to reconnect farming with its market and the rest of the food chain; to reconnect the food chain and the countryside; and to reconnect consumers with what they eat and how it is produced.’
When the report was published in January 2002 it conatined over 100
recommendations the central theme of the report reflected the objectives of the Commission: reconnection. Reconnecting farmers with their market and the rest of the food chain;
Reconnecting the food chain with a healthy and attractive countryside; Reconnecting consumers with what they eat and where it has come from. [2]
It was welcomed by many in the local food movement that finally thought here was a reportthat talked about many of the issues local food groups had long espoused. It also raised the idea of an alternative to the big food and supermarket system. ‘The immediate aftermath of FMD and Curry report did raise the awareness of local food as being a significant alternative strategy for the whole food system in the UK,’ argues Charles Couzens, a leading local food expert.
The job of implementing Curry’s recommendations – called the Implementation Group was also given to an organisation that was headed by Curry. ‘I am very glad that Don Curry himself agreed to chair this group of distinguished outsiders,’ wrote Tony Blair. Also in response, in the 2002 Spending Review, the government promised ‘investment totalling over £500 million over three years will be available to support the key recommendations of the Policy Commission chaired by Sir Don Curry, and to improve animal health and welfare.’[3] Since then millions has been poured into British agriculture. But why nearly four years later is Curry still talking about the need for reconnection? And what about a fair return for farmers, a central theme of the Curry Commission
Notes
- ^ http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/ws/s487.pdf
- ^Phillips, Lord, Bridgeman, J and Ferguson-Smith, Professor M (2000) The BSE Inquiry Report. Evidence and
Supporting Papers of the Inquiry into the Emergence and Identification of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) and Variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease (vCJD) and the Action Taken in Response to it up to 20 March 1996, The Stationery Office, London, October, Vol. One P159; Vol. 6, p 647.
