Dog bites man: well where do you think the foot and mouth leaked from?

We had the anti-big business voices decrying Merial from the word go, with not so much as a skerrick of evidence, on the basis that a big profit-driven corporation was obviously not going to care as much about releasing a nasty virus as much as a decent public-service laboratory.

Well I've met folks from both establishments and I'm happy to stand up and say that they're equally nice, equally conscientious, equally well qualified.

The facilities they occupy are about equally well-designed. One is knocking on a bit. One isn't.

And the other area where the two are not entirely equal is in terms of finance. Merial is well-funded. IAH isn't.

That's not to say that Merial isn't efficiently managed. Of course it is or it wouldn't be the size that it is today. But IAH has been run on a shrinking government shoestring for quite some time and I'm willing to bet that by comparison with Merial its maintenance budget is, well, shall we just say somewhat on the small side?

Martin Shirley has asked, repeatedly as I understand it, for additional funds to repair problems that he knew might pose a potential hazard. His requests appear to have been ignored.

It's the bureaucrat (or polititian) who decided against providing that funding who should be feeling the unwelcome warmth of the spotlight today, not Professor Shirley.

And a final word on big business for those who were convinced from the off that Merial was the source: how could it possibly be in any company's commercial interests to hit the headlines for starting a disease outbreak among its own client base?

Doh!

Mind you, in retrospect, (wonderful thing retrospect; ditto hindsight) I suppose Merial might be pondering the wisdom of disputing paying for repairs to the infamous pipe, even if the pipe in question isn't actually their responsibility.