| Previous Section | Home Page |
Dr. Godman : To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what is the current number of (a) private nursing homes and (b) public nursing homes in (i) Inverclyde, (ii) Strathclyde and (iii) Scotland as a whole ; and what is the number of inspectors to check the standards of care and facilities in nursing homes in (i), (ii) and (iii).
Mr. Michael Forsyth : There are no public nursing homes in Scotland. The information on private nursing homes, as at 31 March 1989, is as follows :
|Number
--------------------------
Inverclyde |3
Strathclyde |125
Scotland |270
The registration and inspection of private nursing homes are the responsibility of health boards and information on the number of staff engaged on these functions is not held centrally.
Dogs
Mrs. Margaret Ewing : To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will list in the Official Report those organisations which responded to the consultation paper on Action on Dogs.
Lord James Douglas-Hamilton : One hundred and six organisations responded to the consultation paper. I am writing to the hon. Member with the details.
Mrs. Margaret Ewing : To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what direction his Department has given to the working group discussing Action on Dogs ; and whether any representatives of the British Veterinary Association are to be invited to give evidence.
Lord James Douglas-Hamilton : The working group's remit will be discussed at its first meeting which we hope will be held later this month. The remit will be broad and will cover not only advice on the implementation of our Action on Dogs proposals but also the investigation of other measures which could strengthen the existing legislation on dogs, including measures which could help reduce the risk of dog attacks. The British Veterinary Association has been asked to nominate a representative to serve on the group.
Column 537
Dentistry
Mr. Nigel Griffiths : To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland by what date he will need to take a decision in order to ensure that the new Edinburgh dental hospital and postgraduate institute can be operative by the time of the closure of the present dental school.
Mr. Michael Forsyth : This depends upon the outcome of Lothian health board's forthcoming appraisal of possible sites.
Mr. Nigel Griffiths : To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what assessment he has made of the effect of the present financial situation of the Lothian health board on the programme for the establishment of the new Edinburgh dental hospital and postgraduate institute.
Mr. Michael Forsyth : I have already made it clear that the Government will meet the capital cost of providing the new dental hospital and institute. The running costs will be considered once we have the results of the Lothian health board's option appraisal. By that time I expect to have the health board's proposals for bringing their income and expenditure into balance.
Mr. Nigel Griffiths : To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what factors he takes into account in determining the number of dental school places.
Mr. Michael Forsyth : This is a matter for the Universities Funding Council and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education and Science.
Mr. Nigel Griffiths : To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what will be the numerical decline in the number
Column 538
of treatment consultations available from the Edinburgh dental hospital from their present annual level for each of the years of the rundown leading up to the closure of the present Edinburgh dental school.Mr. Michael Forsyth : Detailed predictions about the level of treatment consultations up to the closure of Edinburgh dental school is a matter for discussion between Lothian health board and the university of Edinburgh as part of their overall closure programme.
Mr. Nigel Griffiths : To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland when his Department announced its decision to rebuild the Edinburgh dental hospital.
Mr. Michael Forsyth : When the McCallum working party report, "Review of Dental Provision in Scotland", was published in June 1989, we welcomed the recommendation that a replacement dental hospital should be built in Edinburgh. I have already made it clear that the Government will meet the capital cost but progress depends upon the outcome of Lothian health board's forthcoming appraisal of possible sites.
Prisons
Dr. Godman : To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland how many baths and shower-baths there are and how often each prisoner has use of these facilities in each of Her Majesty's prisons in Scotland.
Lord James Douglas-Hamilton : The number of baths and shower-baths and how often each prisoner has use of these facilities, in each of Her Majesty's prisons is set out in the table :
Column 537
Establishment |Number |Number of |Access by prisoners
|of baths |shower-baths
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aberdeen |2 |19 |At least once per week
Barlinnie |5 |74 |Unlimited access
Castle Huntly |- |18 |Unlimited access during recreation
Cornton Vale |33 |39 |Unlimited access
Dumfries |5 |34 |Daily at specified times
Dungavel |2 |19 |Unlimited access outwith working hours
Edinburgh |3 |43 |Unlimited access during recreation
Friarton |1 |6 |Prisoners shower daily
Glenochil:
Adult |1 |41 |Unlimited access
Young offenders |- |30 |Daily following PT or work
Greenock |1 |26 |Unlimited access
Inverness |2 |14 |Unlimited access
Longriggend |1 |29 |Three times per week
Low Moss |- |25 |Unlimited access
Noranside |4 |18 |Unlimited access
Penninghame |1 |11 |Unlimited access outwith working hours
Perth |3 |69 |Daily at specified times
Peterhead |4 |55 |At least once per week
Polmont |- |43 |At least twice per week
Shotts |26 |51 |Unlimited access during association
|-- |--
Total |94 |664
Dr. Godman : To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland how many prisoners are currently imprisoned in each of Her Majesty's prisons in Scotland.
Lord James Douglas-Hamilton : The information is as follows :
Her Majesty's prison |Population at
|23 March 1990
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Aberdeen |133
Barlinnie |848
Barlinnie special unit |8
Castle Huntly<1> |109
Cornton Vale<2> |162
Dumfries<1> |137
Dungavel |123
Edinburgh |544
Friarton |54
Glenochil<2> |480
Greenock |167
Inverness |92
Longriggend<3> |224
Low Moss |313
Noranside |90
Penninghame |58
Perth |424
Peterhead |122
Polmont<1> |387
Shotts |429
|-------
Total |4,904
<1> Young offenders institution.
<2> Prison and young offenders institution combined.
<3> Remand institution.
Agency Nurses
Dr. Godman : To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what is his estimate of the number of agency nurses employed in the National Health Service in Scotland in each of the past five years.
Mr. Michael Forsyth : Information about agency nurses is collected twice yearly and the average whole-time equivalent for the quarter ending 30 September in each of the last five years is as follows :
Year |Whole-time
|equivalent
---------------------------------
1985 |79.8
1986 |144.7
1987 |193.0
1988 |237.7
1989 |128.4
Information is collected centrally only on the whole time equivalent of agency nurses employed in the National Health Service.
Children with Learning Difficulties
Mr. Andrew Welsh : To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland how many children with learning difficulties are now being integrated into mainstream schools who would
Column 540
formerly have been placed in special schools with trained teaching staff, in total and on a regional basis ; and if he will give details of how the progress of such children is monitored.Mr. Lang : The table shows the latest statistics of children with records of needs based in mainstream schools. It is not possible to say how many of these children might, in previous years, have been placed at special schools. Progress of recorded pupils is monitored through reviews carried out under the terms of section 65A of the Education (Scotland) Act 1980.
|c|Recorde pupils based in mainstream schools|c|
|Primary |Secondary
----------------------------------------------------
Borders |10 |35
Central |67 |31
Dumfries and Galloway |111 |74
Fife |1 |15
Grampian |53 |45
Highland |81 |82
Lothian |27 |14
Strathclyde |328 |223
Tayside |9 |21
Orkney |6 |4
Shetland |6 |7
Western Isles |4 |8
|-- |--
Total |703 |559
Argyll and Bute |24 |15
Ayr |118 |69
Dumbarton |27 |17
Glasgow |41 |12
Lanark |31 |59
Renfrew |87 |51
Mr. Andrew Welsh : To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what specialist assistance is being provided for children with learning difficulties who have been or are being integrated into mainstream schools ; and what is their position regarding testing at the ages of eight and 11 years old.
Mr. Lang : Education authorities are responsible for ensuring sufficient specialist assistance is provided for children with learning difficulties. This will vary according to the needs of each individual child.
So far as the testing of children with learning difficulty is concerned, the Government recognise that there are pupils whose records of needs may suggest that their inclusion within the arrangements for national testing would be inappropriate. It will, therefore, be left to the discretion of the education authority, in consultation with parents, to decide in such cases whether or not a child should participate in the tests.
Lafferty Group
Mr. Ron Brown : To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland how many projects involving the failed Lafferty Group were funded by the Scottish Development Agency ;
Column 541
what was the total amount of public money paid to the firm ; whether any legal action has been taken over uncompleted contracts ; and if he will make a statement.Mr. Lang : Three projects involving F. Lafferty (Civil Engineering) Company Ltd., and two projects involving Lafferty Construction Ltd. were funded by the Scottish Development Agency. The amount of money paid is a commercial matter between the agency and the companies involved. The five projects carried out by F. Lafferty (Civil Engineering) Company Ltd. and Lafferty Construction Ltd. have all been completed.
Schools and Colleges (Finance)
Mr. Worthington : To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland on what information he bases his decision about the level of capital financing for Scottish schools and colleges.
Mr. Lang [holding answer 26 March 1990] : The amount of the resources made available for distribution to local authorities for capital expenditure on schools and colleges is determined after taking account of the financial plans and representations submitted by the authorities and of information obtained during school and college inspections. The amount provided for grant aided colleges takes account of their institutional plans and of professional advice.
Fishing Industry
Mr. Kennedy : To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland, pursuant to his reply to the hon. Member for Ross, Cromarty and Skye of 21 March, Official Report, column 647, when he expects to be able to reply to the specific questions raised with him by the Federation of Highlands and Islands Fishermen in their original letter of 3 May 1989 with regard to the grounds on which the claim for compensation by the Ullapool Boat Owners Association has been classed as an application for operating aid and as to why the claim for compensation conflicts with community law ; and when he expects to be able to supply the documents requested by the federation in their letter of 3 May 1989.
Mr. Lang [holding answer 2 April 1990] : Any assistance provided to industry to compensate for changes in circumstances is regarded by the European Commission as an operating aid. This ruling derives from the Commission's interpretation of sections 92 and 93 of the treaty of Rome. The Commission has made it clear that any derogation by them in favour of such an aid would only be given where the aid had a structural purpose. This would not apply in the case submitted by the Ullapool Boat Owners Association. A formal reply was sent to the Federation of Highlands and Islands Fishermen on 13 March 1990.
Local Government Finance
Mr. Wallace : To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will explain the criteria for the distribution of non-HRA allocations for 1990- 91, with specific reference to the sums allocated to Orkney Islands council and Shetland Islands council.
Lord James Douglas-Hamilton [holding answer 2 April 1990] : Non-HRA capital allocations for 1990-91 were
Column 542
determined on the basis of relative housing needs taking account of the authorities' own plans and priorities for tackling these needs. On this basis, Orkney Islands council has received an allocation of £1.15 million and Shetland Islands council has received £0.45 million, the latter meeting the council's request for resources virtually in full.AGRICULTURE, FISHERIES AND FOOD
Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy
Sir John Farr : To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1) if all the research into bovine spongiform encephalopathy is being concentrated under the consultative committee run by Dr. David Tyrrell ; and if he will list where the £12 million for research over the next three years is to be spent ;
(2) if it is the intention of the consultative committee under Dr. David Tyrrell to publish at least annual reports into their activities in the future.
Mr. Gummer : A research consultative committee of scientific experts chaired by Dr. Tyrrell was asked by my predecessor and the Secretary of State for Health to advise on the research work in progress, and additional work required into the disease bovine spongiform encephalo-pathy (BSE) and to set out priorities for further work. I announced the Government's response on 9 January. My Department has committed £6.1 million over the next three years to spongiform encephalopathy research at the Central Veterinary Laboratory, at the Institute for Animal Health, AFRC/MRC Neuropathogenesis Unit, Edinburgh ; and at the Royal Veterinary College, North Mymms. In the same period, the Department of Education and Science has provided for expenditure of £6.3 million on similar research through the Agriculture and Food Research Council at the neuropathogenesis unit and other research establishments. The Secretary of State for Health and I have decided to reconstitute the research consultative committee as the spongiform encephalopathy advisory committee. Dr. Tyrrell has agreed to continue as chairman. The other members are Professor F. Brown, former deputy director (scientific) of the Animal Virus Research Institute, Pirbright, Dr. R. J. Will, consultant neurologist at the Western general hospital, Edinburgh, Dr. R. H. Kimberlin, an independent consultant, and Dr. W. A. Watson, former director of the Central Veterinary Laboratory. Mr. R. Bradley of the Central Veterinary Laboratory will act as an observer and observers from the Medical Research Council and the Agriculture and Food Research Council will participate as necessary.
The new committee will be asked to advise my Department and the Department of Health on matters related to spongiform
encephalopathies. Its work and reporting will therefore be on an ad hoc basis.
Mr. John Evans : To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what was the estimate of the Southwood committee of the level of reporting of bovine spongiform encephalopathy ; what is the current level of reporting ; and if he will make a statement.
Mr. Maclean : The Southwood working party did not predict the level of reporting of suspect BSE cases. At present, around 380 new suspected cases of BSE are being subjected to restrictions each week.
Column 543
Mr. Ron Davies : To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what significance he attaches tothe rising incidence of confirmed bovine spongiform encephalopathy cases ; when he expects the number of confirmed cases to stop rising ; and if he will make a statement.Mr. Maclean : All available evidence on BSE point to a common source epidemic, through feed infected with scrapie, which has been cut off since July 1988. Although the number of suspect cases being notified is continuing to rise at present it is still expected that, provided cattle to cattle transmission does not occur, the incidence of disease will fall after 1993 as the proportion of animals which will have been fed ruminant protein diminishes.
Pesticides
Sir Richard Body : To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, what use he has made of his powers to ban the export of toxic pesticides which are already banned from use on agricultural products in the United Kingdom ; and if he will consider taking powers to ban the import of any food that has been treated with a pesticide, the use of which has been banned in the United Kingdom.
Mr. Maclean : The United Kingdom participates in the United Nations environment programme's (UNEP) notification scheme under which we notify the importing country of any exports of pesticides which are banned or severely restricted here. A pesticide which is not approved in the country may legitimately be permitted in other countries, since usage, climatic conditions and soil types all have an important influence on safety. In the United Kingdom statutory maximum residue levels have been set for some pesticides which are not approved for use here.
Mr. Boswell : To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will make a statement on the regulatory process by which pesticides are approved.
Mr. Gummer : Following is the answer :
1. The statutory framework for the approval of pesticides is laid down in Part III of the Food and Environmental Protection Act 1985 and under the Control of Pesticides Regulations 1986. A system of Departmental and independent assessment of data ensures that only pesticides found to be safe are approved for use. The independent Advisory Committee on Pesticides, supported by the scientific subcommittee, take account of risks to humans, animals and the environment in making recommendations to Ministers on approvals. 2. The introduction of statutory controls on pesticides under FEPA has led to a significant increase in the volume of work in MAFF's and HSE's Evaluation Units. Although the waiting time for applications to extend uses of approved products has been halved over the past year, two key tasks remain : to review to current standards those products approved some time ago, and to speed up the consideration of applications for new pesticides. These are objectives to which consumer, environmental and industry interests attach great importance.
3. To meet these challenges my colleagues and I are providing for further substantial increases in resources in order to improve the effectiveness of the evaluation process. Within the MAFF Evaluation Unit the numbers of scientific staff in post have risen from 25 in April 1986 to 54 currently. In the coming 12 months we shall increase
Column 544
these by a further 60 per cent. to 86. We have introduced special pay scales to recruit and retain the specialised scientific staff required.4. The physical resources available to the Unit are also being enhanced. New accommodation is being acquired, which will bring the Unit together on a single site, at the AFRC's Harpenden complex. This will be the first MAFF office to be equipped in 1991 with computerised office systems, costing about £1 million, to enhance efficiency.
5. In addition to recruiting extra scientists, we are planning to contract out discrete blocks of work in order to increase throughput. Several independent laboratories have been approached and specimen contracts will be issued shortly as a pilot exercise. The contract work will of course be subject to close monitoring for quality assurance. The internal resources saved will be switched to the highly demanding emergency reviews.
6. Because of the high standards of safety which we apply, and the complexity of modern regulatory work, the training of the new staff will be given high priority. Although this will absorb significant resources we nevertheless aim to increase threefold the capacity to process new pesticides, from eight in 1990-91, to 12 in 1991-92, 20 in 1992-93, and 25 per year thereafter. This is a realistic plan and these targets are stretching but achievable.
7. Similarly the number of reviews of older pesticides, full and partial, will rise from 12 in 1990-91 to 29 in 1991-92, and 37 in 1992-93. The total number of pesticides registered in the United Kingdom before 1981 is over 250 and all these will be reviewed, subject to a priority ranking exercise which is being established, with the advice of the Advisory Committee on Pesticides. For agricultural pesticides, we intend this work to form part of a co-ordinated 10-year European Community programme for the review of older pesticides. Indeed, what we have proposed will more than match our likely share of the Community programme. We always of course check as a matter of urgency any approved pesticides against which doubts have been cast. On non-agricultural pesticides the United Kingdom Government has taken the lead in pressing the EC for a harmonised approach similar to that proposed for agricultural pesticides.
8. We have already approached all approval holders to alert them to the review programme and to ask whether or not they hold data packages for their products which are capable of meeting modern standards. Those who have not replied will shortly have their approvals withdrawn.
9. To ensure that such a large review programme does not recur we have decided that in future all approvals will be time-limited, so that regular reviews will be required automatically if re-approval is sought.
10. Inevitably the increase in resources will give rise to an increase in fees for the approval of a new active ingredient. The increase from £7,000 to £30,000 has taken effect from yesterday. The pesticides industry as a whole has made public its willingness to pay for the additional resources necessary to provide a better service. 11. A key element in maintaining public confidence in the safety of approved pesticides is the advice from the Advisory Committee on Pesticides which is impartial and of the highest level of expertise. My colleagues and I have decided that all evaluations prepared by the Committee and the data underlying them will be made available for public scrutiny in as open a way as anywhere in the world.
Column 545
12. Although our data indicates that our food generally contains very low levels of pesticide residues I have been examining how we might obtain further reassurance on the safety of our food. The Government already carries out an extensive programme of testing food, feedingstuffs, human tissues and wildlife, costing £1.5 million per year. We have approached representatives of food manufacturers, retailers, and local authorities who also perform a significant number of tests and they have in principle agreed to make their results available to the Government. This will greatly enlarge the data available on residues. For example, we know already that the number of samples of wheat available to us will be multiplied at least ten times.13. In relation to non-agricultural pesticides there is also a good story to tell. Since April 1987 the numbers of HSE scientists dealing with pesticide approval have increased from 6.6 to 18.5. This will further increase to 25.5 in April 1990, and it is intended to reach the complement of 31.5 by April 1991. However, as with MAFF, this will require that the training of staff is given a high priority and there is no significant loss of staff to outside organisations. 14. Thus it is envisaged that by 1994 evaluation work of new active ingredients will start immediately an application for approval is received.
15. HSE plans to have completed its review programme of older non- agricultural pesticides within the next 10 years. Reviews have already been initiated on a number of active ingredients on which there has been public concern, and a review programme drawn up for the rest.
Salmonella
Mrs. Gorman : To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what information he has on the pasteurisation of eggs from salmonella enteritidis infected flocks in the United States of America ; and whether he has any information on the incidence of food poisoning from pasteurised eggs from salmonella enteritidis infected flocks in the United States of America.
Mr. Maclean : Very little information has been published on either pasteurisation of eggs from infected flocks or the incidence of food poisoning from pasteurised egg produced from eggs from infected flocks in the United States of America.
Mrs. Gorman : To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will describe the procedure through which pasteurisation of eggs from infected flocks can encourage cross-contamination in circumstances where raw liquid egg is commonly contaminated by salmonella.
Mr. Maclean : The risk of cross-contamination exists in any food processing plant and therefore the use of contaminated raw materials should be avoided as far as possible. The possible routes of contamination will depend on several factors, including plant design, hygiene procedures etc.
Column 546
Irradiated Potatoes
Dr. Thomas : To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what will be the effect on the production and identification of solanin in potatoes exposed to irradiation.
Mr. Maclean : In 1986 the Advisory Committee on Irradiated and Novel Foods assessed extensive data relating to the irradiation of potatoes and found no evidence of adverse effects.
Nitrates
Dr. Thomas : To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will obtain for his departmental library a copy of the book, "Nitrates : The Threat to Food and Water", by Nigel Dudley, published by Green Print.
Mr. Curry : We have already done so.
Mr. John Greenway : To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will make a statement on the pilot nitrate scheme.
Mr. Gummer : Following extensive consultations on the pilot nitrate scheme, I have decided, subject to Commission clearance under article 93,3 of the treaty of Rome, to confirm that 10 areas should be designated as nitrate sensitive areas (NSAs), and that intensive advisory campaigns should be conducted in a further nine areas. This important new pilot scheme is aimed at tackling the problem, experienced throughout Europe and elsewhere, of unacceptable levels of nitrate leaching from farmland into water sources. It will provide valuable insights into a problem which is not scientifically fully understood, and point the way for future policy. I hope the scheme will be a major success and that it will receive the high level of support which it deserves.
As indicated in earlier announcements, payments will be made to those farmers in nitrate sensitive areas who voluntarily undertake to observe restrictions on their agricultural practices. I hope that as many farmers as possible will enter our basic scheme under which payments will be made for restrictions on all their NSA land which, while substantial, will enable them broadly to maintain current farming patterns. These payments will vary depending on the nitrate sensitive area in line with overall differences in the costs of compliance between different areas.
Farmers who participate in the basic scheme will in addition be able to enter the premium scheme, by converting some or all of their arable land to various forms of grassland. Payments will vary depending on the nitrate sensitive area (since overall assessments of the costs of compliance differ), the option chosen, and the proportion of a farmer's land affected, (since the latter affects the fixed cost savings). The premium scheme requirements will help to protect the environment generally and promote conservation. The areas, basic rates of payment, and premium rates for conversion of arable to unfertilised ungrazed grassland are as follows, (£/ha) :
Column 547
|c|Nitrate sensitive areas (NSAs)|c|
Basic Premium
[percentage of total holdin
|0-25 |25-75 |75-100
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Sleaford (Lincolnshire) |85 |380 |290 |200
2. Branston Booths (Lincolnshire) |95 |380 |290 |200
3. Ogbourne St. George (Wiltshire) |55 |380 |290 |200
4. Old Chalford (Oxfordshire) |55 |330 |265 |200
5. Egford (Somerset) |55 |380 |290 |200
6. Boughton (Nottinghamshire) |75 |280 |240 |200
7. Wildmoor (Hereford and Worcestershire) |70 |280 |240 |200
8. Wellings (Staffordshire and Shropshire) |65 |280 |240 |200
9. Tom Hill (Staffordshire) |70 |280 |240 |200
10. Kilham (Humberside) |55 |330 |265 |200
Premium rates (which are paid in addition to basic rates) will be adjusted, in relation to those shown above, as follows :
|£
---------------------------------------------------------
For unfertilised grazed grass |30/ha less
For grass with up to 150 kg N/ha |110/ha less
For grass and woodland |100/ha less
Though for the latter, payments under the farm woodland scheme should also apply.
Intensive pig and poultry farmers will receive individually assessed payments towards the cost of additional storage (pig farmers only) and/or transport requirements calculated against number of livestock.
The advisory areas will be as follows :
1. The Swells (Gloucestershire)
2. Bircham and Fring (Norfolk)
3. Hillington, Gayton and Congham (Norfolk)
4. Sedgeford (Norfolk)
5. Fowlmere (Cambridgeshire)
6. Far Baulker (Nottinghamshire)
7. Dotton and Colaton (Devon)
8. Cringle Brook (Lincolnshire and Leicestershire)
9. Bourne Brook (Warwickshire)
All farms in the advisory areas will be visited by an ADAS officer and encouraged voluntarily to follow practices designed to reduce the risk of nitrate leaching at little or no cost to themselves or even a small benefit.
Column 548
Full details of the measures and payment rates have been placed in the Libraries of both Houses. The Secretary of State for the Environment and I shall be laying before the House in due course a statutory instrument designating the NSAs and setting out the measures and payment rates under the basic and premium schemes. Our intention is for the order to come into effect by 1 June.Bass
Mr. Rowlands : To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when he proposes to introduce his proposals for nursery areas for the conservation of bass.
Mr. Curry : I hope to make an announcement shortly.
| Next Section
| Home Page |