GOVERNMENT officials last night attempted to play down reports that farmers have been colluding with valuers to crank up the compensation they received for livestock slaughtered during the foot-and-mouth crisis.

An inquiry into the amount of cash spent on the scheme is under way just days after the Prime Minister announced the Government is suspending a clean-up on farms already hit by the disease.

Again, the soaring cost was the reason, with the bill for disinfecting English properties often three times more than in Scotland.

But, yesterday, a spokesman for the Department of Environment, Farming and Rural Affairs (Defra) insisted the department was not pointing the finger at farmers.

He said: "The scheme was successful when the crisis was at its worst - putting a base in the market allowed us the deal with culling on infected farms within 24 hours and contiguous properties within 48.

"However, now there are fewer cases, there is less pressure on valuers and more time to allow a review."

North Yorkshire spokesman for the National Farmers' Un-ion Rob Simpson said the fact that there were fewer animals available was bound to force market prices up, which would have a knock-on effect on the value of slaughtered stock.

He said: "The unhealthy blame culture that is developing is particularly distressing for farmers who have faced the heartache of having their animals slaughtered and now feel they are being blamed, if only by association, with allegations of over-inflated prices.

"The NFU has no evidence of farmers colluding with valuers. It has already written to Defra expressing its fears for farmers who will be disadvantaged when trying to replace stock because of these rising market values.''

Meanwhile, the Country Land and Business Association yesterday turned the tables, demanding a public inquiry into the Government's handling of the foot-and-mouth crisis.

Tony Blair has indicated he feels it would be unnecessary.

However, the CLA's North-East regional director, Anthony Haslam, said: "An inquiry in public, once foot-and-mouth is over, would enable Defra to show it is fulfilling its remit.

"For lessons to be learned for the future, the inquiry's recommendations will need to be made public and it is therefore important to make the evidence public by holding a public inquiry.'

Read more about foot-and-mouth here.