21 Nov 1996 : Column 1085
House of Commons
Thursday 21 November 1996
The House met at half-past Two o'clock
PRAYERS
[Madam Speaker in the Chair]
Oral Answers to Questions
AGRICULTURE, FISHERIES AND FOOD
Milk Quota
1. Mr. Nigel Evans: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what representations he has received concerning the level of the milk quota in the United Kingdom. [3719]
The Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Mr. Douglas Hogg): The Commission will present the Council with an options paper on the future of the dairy industry early next year. I shall continue to resist any arbitrary cuts in the United Kingdom's allocation.
Mr. Evans: I thank my right hon. and learned Friend for that answer and for visiting my constituency recently and talking directly to several farmers who have been hit by the bovine spongiform encephalopathy crisis. He heard the concerns of farmers in my constituency, especially Mr. Paul Kenny who has a farm in Slaidburn and who spoke about the milk quota problem. Our milk quota is not sufficient to meet the amount that we should produce for home consumption. That problem has been exacerbated by the BSE crisis because many cattle that would not normally be in the fields are being kept out and producing milk. I fear that we will hit our quota sooner rather than later, but may face a shortage of milk thanks to the quota problem. Can he reassure farmers in Ribble Valley that he is working hard to ensure that we get an increased milk quota and that he is doing all that he can to ameliorate the current crisis?
Mr. Hogg: I enjoyed my visit to my hon. Friend's constituency and I remember Mr. Kenny and the point that he made. In the long term, we would like the system of quotas to be done away with. In the short term, the position is more encouraging than some people have imagined in the sense that milk production is now 0.5 per cent. below the quota profile. That is an encouraging state of affairs.
Mr. Stevenson: Is not the reality that the Government failed the country in 1984 when they agreed to milk quotas way below our requirements? Is not the solution to that problem the abolition of milk quotas? Has the Minister discussed with the new members of the European Community--Sweden, Finland and Austria--their views of the future of milk quotas?
Mr. Hogg: There are several concepts of what we should have when the present system of milk quotas
21 Nov 1996 : Column 1086
expires in 2000. The United Kingdom would much prefer to do away with quotas and price support of the present sort, although there would have to be a fairly extended transitional period. We must await the options paper, which we will get early next year. It is extraordinary that a Labour Member should make a point about a bad baseline, however, because we got less than we would have liked as a direct consequence of the agri-monetary policy pursued by the Labour party in the 1970s, which prevented us from having a sufficient output to justify a larger basic quota.
Mr. Garnier: May I take it that my right hon. and learned Friend is aware of the dilemma faced by dairy farmers in my constituency and elsewhere? With the uncertainty over the accelerated cull, they do not know whether to dry off their cows or continue to milk them throughout the winter and thus go over quota. That causes difficulties with forward planning. Will he take that into account in his discussions with his European counterparts?
Mr. Hogg: My hon. and learned Friend makes a sound point. It is highly desirable that dairy producers in his constituency should know the situation as exactly, and as soon, as possible.
Mrs. Golding: Is the Minister aware that milk quotas, with his deregulation policies, have pushed up prices, destroyed jobs and caused problems with doorstep delivery? Will he make more effort to encourage children to drink milk rather than make policies that store up health problems for later life, such as osteoporosis?
Mr. Hogg: I do not want to be unkind to the hon. Lady, but the first part of her question was total nonsense. The process of deregulation has actually been a great success.
BSE (Pet Food)
2. Mr. Heppell: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what measures he has taken to ensure that BSE-infected cattle are not used by pet food manufacturers. [3720]
Mr. Douglas Hogg: Since 1988, all cattle suspected of having BSE must, by law, be notified to the Ministry; those affected are then slaughtered and the carcase incinerated.
Mr. Heppell: Does the Minister have any contingency plans if any cross-species infection is identified, so that we do not have the same sort of inept muddle that we have had with mad cow disease if we identify mad dog disease?
Mr. Hogg: That is not a well-directed question.
Mr. Stewart: Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that the industry has always been in the lead on safety matters? For example, the member companies of the Pet Food Manufacturers Association had a voluntary ban on the use of specified bovine offal six months before the House passed legislation on human use. Will he reassure the House that he will keep in the closest touch
21 Nov 1996 : Column 1087
with the industry at the highest level as well as at official level, so that the industry is fully apprised of European developments?
Mr. Hogg: Yes, indeed; but the controls that we have in abattoirs, rendering plants and knackeries are the toughest in Europe and address all the points about which my hon. Friend is concerned and which underpin his question.
Mr. Tyler: In connection with all the measures for the eradication of BSE to which the Minister has referred, does he accept that there is continuing concern about the mismanagement of the slaughter programme? Has he read the article in a recent edition of Professional Engineering, which refers to the fact that, although the welcome increase in the slaughter programme to around 55,000 a week is dramatic, only about 1,000 carcases are being safely disposed of? The report states--I hope that he will confirm this--that the Ministry is still "frantically searching" for a safe solution to that problem. Does the right hon. and learned Gentleman accept that there is still widespread concern at the Government's failure to take a grip on the cull?
Mr. Hogg: I really do not think that that criticism is especially well founded. On the over-30-month scheme, we now have the slaughter rate up to around 60,000--the total was slightly more than 60,000 last week--and, given that rate, I am confident that we can clear the backlog by the end of the year, as we said some time ago.
Mr. Robert Hughes: Which year?
Mr. Hogg: At the end of this year. That is an absurd intervention. The hon. Gentleman is simply causing confusion.
Set-aside (Bird Life)
3. Mr. Spring: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what steps he has taken to protect bird life on set-aside land. [3722]
The Minister of State, Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Mr. Tony Baldry): The management rules for set-aside are designed to protect wildlife and the environment. Further changes are being introduced in 1997 to restrict the cutting, and prohibit the cultivation, of set-aside during the main nesting season to protect birds such as lapwing and skylark.
Mr. Spring: I welcome the new changes in the management of set-aside as it affects bird life. Does my hon. Friend agree that the issue of bird life is one of considerable interest to those of us who are lucky enough to live in rural areas? Is he aware, for example, that the rare stone curlew comes to nest at Elveden in my constituency, and that the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, with lottery funding, is recreating the natural habitat of the fens at Lakenheath as it existed prior to the draining of the fens several hundred years ago?
Mr. Baldry: The Government and landowners do an enormous amount, both on set-aside and non-set-aside land, to promote bird life. We have environmentally sensitive areas and the countryside stewardship scheme,
21 Nov 1996 : Column 1088
and landowners co-operate with the farming and wildlife advisory group. Those are excellent initiatives. Indeed, encouraged by the RSPB, they are all worthwhile initiatives to promote bird life.
Mr. Gordon Prentice: The Minister mentioned the agri-environment regulations, but can I direct his attention to the organic aid scheme? Birds thrive in an organic environment and, although I applaud the Government's action on the organic aid scheme, why is no help given to farmers who already farm organically? Is not that a change that should be made?
Mr. Baldry: Farmers who farm organically will find increasingly that they will be rewarded in the marketplace. They should not require reward from the Government. If they believe that there is a demand for organic farming, that reward will come to them in the marketplace subsequently.
Intervention Buying
4. Mr. Trickett: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what estimate he has made of expenditure on the intervention buying of agricultural commodities in the United Kingdom in 1996-97. [3723]
Mr. Douglas Hogg: Estimated expenditure on the intervention buying of agricultural commodities in the United Kingdom in 1996-97 is £320 million.
Mr. Trickett: Can the Minister confirm that 413,000 tonnes of beef now stands in a mountain in intervention? Does he accept that that is a clear measure of the Government's failure to deal with the BSE crisis adequately? Does he accept that the only way to restore consumer confidence is to establish an absolutely independent, customer-oriented food standards agency, which might help to restore consumer confidence?
Mr. Hogg: In the financial year 1996-97, purchases of beef are expected to amount to about 100,000 tonnes. We have had to intervene in the market as a consequence of the collapse in consumer confidence that has occurred as a result of what is commonly referred to as the BSE crisis. It is a consequence of the lack of market confidence.
Mr. Salmond: Intervention buying is an important way to stabilise agricultural markets, so what action are the Government taking to stabilise the European market in farmed salmon? Is the Chancellor of the Exchequer blocking progress to stabilise that market? Could it be that an industry that contributes 6,000 jobs and £250 million to the Scottish economy is not important enough to deserve effective action from the Government?
Mr. Hogg: That is a question of such complexity that I propose to respond to the hon. Gentleman in writing.
Dr. Strang: Does the Minister agree that his vacillation over the Florence agreement is undermining efforts to restore beef markets throughout Europe? The right hon. and learned Gentleman makes great play of the fact that the UK has met four of the five Florence obligations, but does he realise that three of those four conditions relate to human and animal health and should have been met
21 Nov 1996 : Column 1089
years ago, and that the chaos in the Government's over-30-month slaughter scheme led to the fourth condition--that the Government get their act together? Regarding the fifth condition, for which, apparently, the Minister has not yet presented proposals, will he tell the House today whether he will implement a selective slaughter programme--yes or no?
Mr. Hogg: The premise that underpins the hon. Gentleman's question is the lack of confidence in European markets. There is indeed a lack of confidence in European markets. There has been a collapse in the sale price of beef in European markets, and there is much anxiety among the farming community. That has certainly had an effect on members of the European Union, making them less willing or able--two ways of describing the same thing--than they previously were to proceed rapidly and substantially to lift the ban.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |