| Home Page |
Column 421
House of Commons
Thursday 4 May 1995
The House met at half-past Two o'clock
PRAYERS
[ Madam Speaker -- in the Chair ]
PRIVATE BUSINESS
City of Westminster Bill
[Lords]
Order for consideration read.
To be considered on Thursday 11 May.
Oral Answers to Questions
AGRICULTURE, FISHERIES AND FOOD
Agricultural Surpluses
1. Mr. Davidson: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he will take steps to make common agricultural policy surpluses available for distribution throughout the United Kingdom by the intervention board in the same manner as existing surplus beef stocks are distributed. [20809]
The Minister of State, Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Mr. Michael Jack): The level of intervention stocks both in the United Kingdom and in the European Union as a whole has fallen dramatically and the introduction of additional disposal measures would not be justified.
Mr. Davidson: Is the Minister aware that 160,000 tins of EC surplus beef are being delivered to my constituency tomorrow for distribution to my constituents? Will he join me in welcoming the actions of volunteers who are prepared to distribute that beef to my constituents? Does he further agree that it would be far better if the surplus butter and cheese currently held in stocks was distributed to my constituents, many of whom are also willing to help the Government reduce the EC wine lake by being prepared to dispose of some of the stocks personally?
Mr. Jack: I certainly join the hon. Gentleman in thanking all the voluntary organisations which give so freely of their time, energy and effort to ensure that the stocks can reach those eligible to receive them. The hon. Gentleman may not be aware that we are spending the full allocation of £26 million on the distribution of beef. He may also not be aware that butter is not included because, since the changes in the common agricultural policy, we no longer have enough stocks to justify national distribution. At present there are only three days' equivalent stock in store in the United Kingdom.
Mr. Clifton-Brown: Can my hon. Friend confirm that intervention stocks of beef, cereals and butter have been reduced dramatically since 1993? Will he give the
Column 422
percentage reductions and confirm that that is very good news for the taxpayer as it has reduced expenditure on intervention stocks under the common agricultural policy?Mr. Jack: My hon. Friend, who takes a keen interest in these matters, is absolutely right in his line of questioning. Compared with the peak in 1993, total expenditure on this budget head has dropped by 44 per cent. in terms of Community money for the disposal of surpluses. With regard to the specific areas that my hon. Friend requested, the answer is that there has been a 73 per cent. drop in cereals, a 95 per cent. drop in beef stocks and an 84 per cent. drop in butter stocks since 1993. As my hon. Friend will appreciate, if we carry on like that there will be no beef in intervention at the end of the year, which clearly brings the future of this type of disposal into question.
Fur Farming
2. Mrs. Roche: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will make a statement about fur farming. [20933]
The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Mrs. Angela Browning): Welfare conditions are monitored regularly by the State Veterinary Service on the basis of recommendations adopted by the Council of Europe. The Ministry is responsible for the issue of licences to keep mink in secure conditions.
Mrs. Roche: Does the Minister accept that there is great concern among many people, including my constituents who are concerned about animal welfare, about keeping arctic foxes in cages? Should not that practice be banned immediately?
Mrs. Browning: The hon. Lady will know that the Golding report of 1994, as considered by the Farm Animal Welfare Council, covered the question of arctic foxes. We have consulted on the matter and are currently considering whether further action is needed.
Lady Olga Maitland: Will my hon. Friend confirm that every fur farm is visited by the State Veterinary Service to ensure that the very highest standards are maintained?
Mrs. Browning: Yes, I can confirm that. In addition, they receive visits from the Agricultural Development Advisory Service in respect of their licensing conditions.
Mr. Tony Banks: The Minister knows that I took evidence to one of her predecessors showing many clear examples of mink farms not following any acceptable standards. Why on earth do we allow fur farming in this country? It is a barbaric practice and we should stop it.
Mrs. Browning: There are two key points. First, if the hon. Gentleman has evidence, I shall be happy to look at it again as I did not deal with the matter when he originally made his complaints. If he will furnish me with the evidence that he gave to my predecessor, I will look at the individual cases again.
Secondly, the hon. Gentleman will know that although the FAWC report disapproved of fur farms, it did not recommend that they should be banned. He will also be aware that there has been quite a significant drop, particularly in the number of mink farms.
Column 423
Environmentally Sensitive Areas
3. Mr. Ian Bruce: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what plans he has to take forward the environmentally sensitive area scheme. [20934]
The Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Mr. William Waldegrave): The scheme has been an outstanding success as I saw onrecent visits to Halvergate marshes in Norfolk and the mountains of Mourne in Newry and Mourne.
Mr. Bruce: My right hon. Friend will know that the environmentally sensitive areas in my constituency, and the farmers who care for them, are thankful for the grants that are being made and that not only is that good for farmers and the environment, but it is good for tourism. Will he look at the effects that the Agricultural Tenancies Bill will have on the way in which environmentally sensitive area levies and grants are paid to tenant farmers or to landlords or to a combination of the two, as that matter is causing some concern to many farmers locally?
Mr. Waldegrave: I agree with my hon. Friend and many other people that the environmentally sensitive areas scheme has been an outstanding success. What started all those years ago in the Halvergate marshes became a European movement and was the beginning of the greening of agricultural policy more widely in Europe. We in this country, through individual campaigners such as Andrew Lees, academics such as Professor O'Riordan and even the Ministers who were involved at the time, take genuine pride in that.
On my hon. Friend's point about the Agricultural Tenancies Bill, I think that the new farm business tenancies will help as we know that quite a lot of farmers have been having to take tenancies on short lets because that is all that is available. In those situations, there has to be a complicated negotiation with the landlord because the scheme has to be joined for five years at a time. Once it becomes easier for farmers to get tenancies of rather longer duration, that will simplify the system and benefit the farmers concerned.
Mr. Campbell-Savours: Should a farmer be able to make a profit out of an environmentally sensitive area?
Mr. Waldegrave: The object of the payments is to ensure that enough people join the scheme to make it work, so there has be to be an incentive element in it. The previous schemes were all based on compulsion, so yes, there should be an incentive to enable people to join voluntarily. Up and down the country, we have found that those who join voluntarily put far more into the schemes than those who are compelled.
Live Animal Exports
5. Mr. Cyril D. Townsend: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what is the latest estimate of the number of live animals exported from the United Kingdom each year. [20939]
Mrs. Browning: Export trends vary by species. The latest figures from the Meat and Livestock Commission showed that exports of calves fell in the last quarter of last year compared with the same period of 1993 and the figures for sheep indicate a sharper drop.
Mr. Townsend: First, I deplore the outrageous letter bomb attacks on my right hon. Friend the Minister of
Column 424
Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and on my right hon. Friend the Member for Bridgwater (Mr. King). Does my hon. Friend agree that a possible result of port-side mobs will be longer journeys for animals, and thus greater suffering, as well as the destruction of a legitimate livelihood for many farmers?Mrs. Browning: I am sure that my hon. Friend reflects the feelings of the whole House in deploring violence and terrorism in making a political point when in a democracy we have other, more suitable methods. With regard to the effect of demonstrations on animal welfare, my hon. Friend will know that officials from the Ministry and from trading standards departments would always ensure that if the welfare of animals at the point of departure had been so disrupted that it was felt necessary that they should not continue the journey, the necessary steps would be taken to ensure that the welfare of those animals was protected. My hon. Friend is quite right that windscreens being broken and lots of noise from thumping on the lorries cannot be in the interests of animal welfare.
Common Agricultural Policy
6. Mr. Canavan: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what plans he has to seek changes in the common agricultural policy; and if he will make a statement. [20940]
Mr. Waldegrave: I will continue to press for improvements to the common agricultural policy at every suitable opportunity.
Mr. Canavan: Does the Minister agree with the Chief Secretary to the Treasury that the common agricultural policy costs the average family in this country £28 per week? Is it not about time the Government took firmer action to scrap that policy, which is costing the taxpayer billions of pounds a year and leading to mountains of food going to waste and, last year alone, to more than £300 million being lost in fraud?
Mr. Waldegrave: Figures of that kind are extremely difficult to be precise about. Subsequent calculations undertaken by my Department with the full agreement of the Treasury suggest that the sum is much lower-- something like £4 a week. The whole basis of the figures is guesstimates about what will happen to world prices because of the dumping of agricultural products, and they are not a very satisfactory way to examine what will happen in future. I am not disagreeing with the hon. Gentleman--we want a far cheaper policy which is much nearer to the market. British farming is quite efficient enough nowadays to compete on the world market, and many aspects of the CAP are now inhibiting the gains in efficiency and proper farming practices. We should like people to be freer and freer to compete.
Mr. Knapman: Will my right hon. Friend bear it in mind that on average the United Kingdom has much larger farms than many of our European Community partners, which sometimes means that we have different interests? Will he consider that aspect when he fights for British agriculture?
Mr. Waldegrave: My hon. Friend is right. The history of British food production is entirely different from that in most of continental Europe. We have had a long tradition, going right back to the repeal of the corn laws,
Column 425
of fundamentally free trade in food, and the 1840s, 1850s and 1860s saw the departure from the land of a large number of people who had worked it. In many countries in Europe, that process has yet to be undertaken and there is a completely different land-holding structure as a result. My hon. Friend is right to say that we often find ourselves defending somewhat different interests from the rest of Europe.Mr. Enright: Is the Minister aware of the fact that during a recent visit of the Select Committee on European Legislation the hon. Member for Northampton, North (Mr. Marlow) announced to a bemused Brussels audience that he did not want the CAP to be changed because it did too well for British farmers? Does the Minister share that view?
Mr. Waldegrave: Notwithstanding my hon. Friend's important comments, the Government's position is that we want a policy which is cheaper for the consumer, which allows greater freedom to farmers not to have their business dictated by quotas and controls and which is cheaper for the taxpayer, too. I also believe that in such a world, if we can bring down agricultural subsidies in north America at the same time, British farming will do very well.
Environmental Programmes
7. Mr. John Greenway: To ask the Ministerof Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what progress hasbeen made with his Department's environmental programmes. [20942]
Mr. Waldegrave: My Department is making excellent progress on a number of environmental initiatives. We have recently added a new moorland scheme to the existing range of agri-environment schemes. We have also made significant progress in attaching environmental conditions to the common agricultural policy and in linking agri-environment and forestry schemes with set-aside.
Mr. Greenway: My right hon. Friend will appreciate that, with no environmentally sensitive area in the North York Moors national park, the introduction of the moorland scheme will greatly help farmers and landowners there to conserve the much-valued heather and grouse moorland. Does not this initiative show that, while others talk of fancy ideas for conservation, it is the Government who are doing something practical? Will my right hon. Friend ensure that environmental schemes continue to be based on good science and proper and adequate compensation for loss of farm income?
Mr. Waldegrave: I can certainly give my hon. Friend the assurance that he seeks. It is perfectly true that the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, for example, and others have been, are and will remain strong supporters of these schemes. After all, the moorlands and uplands of England contain the only bird species that is entirely unique to the United Kingdom--the grouse--so it is a good idea to conserve them.
Mr. Foulkes: Is not the Minister's policy on the environment undermined by the privatised electricity companies retaining compulsory powers that they had when they were publicly owned, enabling them to string pylons across the countryside, which is cheaper than undergrounding, and to pay farmers peanuts in compensation for putting those unsightly pylons on their land?
Column 426
Mr. Waldegrave: I well remember the last great wave of pylon building, which happened during a period of Labour government. Very few of those great cables were put underground because of the expense involved. Nevertheless, individual schemes--I know that there is a controversial one, to which I am sure that the hon. Gentleman is referring--will be looked at extremely carefully.Mr. Marland: Is my right hon. Friend in a position to tell the House a little more about his plans for putting trees on set-aside land? It is an excellent idea, on which he was active in European forums, and it is a much more constructive use of agricultural land than leaving it fallow.
Mr. Waldegrave: I have made it one of my objectives, and we are making progress with it. The specialist committee examining the proposals has ironed out all the technical problems which remained. We now have to get the proposals through the Council of Ministers, and I have every confidence that we shall. It is a far better use of set-aside land than simply growing weeds.
Drinks (Dental Health Warnings)
8. Mrs. Anne Campbell: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what plans he has to place dental health warnings on drinks with a high sugar content. [20943]
Mrs. Browning: We have no plans to introduce labelling requirements of the type mentioned by the hon. Lady. If sugar is added, it must be mentioned in the ingredients list. Total sugar content may also be mentioned in the nutrition labelling panel.
Mrs. Campbell: Is the Minister aware that a typical carton of fruit juice aimed at children as young as four months contains the equivalent of 18 teaspoonfuls of sugar? Does she agree that that is contributing considerably to the deterioration in children's dental health? Does she not think that parents should be warned?
Mrs. Browning: I certainly think that parents should be made aware of the dangers of any constituent in food which could have a dangerous effect on the health of anybody, whether young children or adults, if that is accurate. We seek to ensure that labelling is as comprehensive as possible, to inform people and to let them make informed decisions themselves.
If one follows the logic of the hon. Lady's suggestion, what sort of label would one use? Would it say, "Don't feed this to babies"? Would she have a label on dairy products, for instance, saying, "Don't eat this for a certain reason"? Where would one stop? It seems much more sensible to give comprehensive information, to make sure that people make informed choices, and to put warning labels on foods only when that is appropriate--for example, on products containing nuts, to which certain people are allergic. These may have serious health consequences, but people may not notice the nut content mentioned on the label. We therefore ask manufacturers to flag on the label the fact that a product contains nuts.
Mrs. Ann Winterton: Does my hon. Friend agree that there is sufficient information on labels at present? On the sugar content of drinks and other foodstuffs and the link with dental caries, does she agree that the best way
Column 427
forward is to have more parental discipline, with children cleaning their teeth thoroughly morning, noon and night, and less interference by the nanny state? [Interruption.]Mrs. Browning: My hon. Friend is exactly right. The new nanny state sits opposite us. Opposition Members jeer at the idea of parents giving their young children sensible advice and help in looking after their dental health. The cleaning of young children's teeth and gums with fluoride toothpaste is part of the programme that the Department of Health has initiated to make sure that we protect young children in a practical and sensible way.
Mr. Martyn Jones: Is the Minister aware that in Germany there are dental health warnings on all drinks that are marketed for children, including formula milk feeds? Why cannot we have similar warning labels to prevent the increasing scourge of infant tooth decay in this country?
Mrs. Browning: Because this is not Germany. I admire the hon. Gentleman's last-ditch attempt to debate with me the rights and wrongs of infant formulae. He has had a full debate on the matter, and he has participated in an Adjournment debate, but he has not convinced me yet.
Mr. Jenkin: I assure my hon. Friend that the vast majority of parents in this country are probably already aware that sugar has a detrimental effect on teeth, and do not need a dental health label imposed by a regulating Labour Government to tell them so. My hon. Friend's reference to nuts was entirely appropriate in the context of that proposal, which shows that, for all the ditching of clause IV, the Labour party has lost none of its interfering, nannying attitudes.
Mrs. Browning: My hon. Friend has summed up not only the Opposition's approach to the common sense of the British public but their indictment of the food industry in general. I agree that this is not a nanny state, and that so long as people receive the right information and can access it they are quite able to make the right decisions for themselves.
Renewable Energy Crops
9. Mr. Soley: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what studies his Department has carried out on crops that can be grown for renewable energy purposes. [20944]
Mr. Jack: The Department is currently funding research on short rotation coppice, miscanthus and bio-diesel.
Mr. Soley: Perhaps the Minister could begin by taking the 50 per cent. tax off bio-diesel, thus getting a good headline on tax, for a change. Even more importantly, will the Ministry try to liaise better with the Department of Trade and Industry on coppicing so that renewable energy sources, which dramatically reduce levels of carbon dioxide and sulphur dioxide, can be produced?
Mr. Jack: As no product called bio-diesel, as such, is commercially available, it would be difficult to take a tax off it. It is typical of the Labour party's approach to invent a tax and then challenge the Government about what they intend to do about it. We are working closely with the DTI on coppicing, and the hon. Gentleman will know that we, with Sweden, are leaders within Europe in that
Column 428
respect. As for the so-called non-fossil fuel obligation--NFFO 3--three projects on short rotational coppice have now been approved. We are pleased about that because if the projects prove viable they will require the use of 9,000 hectares of land to produce the wood.Sir David Steel: With reference to the earlier question about growing trees on set-aside land, have the Government been following the Swedish experience of growing short-life willow trees and using them to fuel power stations? Have the Government yet reached any conclusion about the viability of that?
Mr. Jack: I hope that I do not do the right hon. Gentleman an injustice, but when I was talking about short rotational coppice, I meant willow trees. As I said, 9,000 hectares of land would need to be farmed if the three projects technically approved under the NFFO 3 tranche of alternative energy sources come to fruition. If the promoters achieve financial viability, the opportunity to unlock the potential of the land using willow will be there.
Medical Aspects of Food Policy
10. Mr. Cohen: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what new policies his Department has adopted following the last report by the Committee on Medical Aspects of Food Policy. [20945]
Mrs. Browning: The report does not require any major adaptations to existing policies, but we shall take account of it as necessary.
Mr. Cohen: Are not the Government treating that important committee report like an old limp chip--left in the wrapping, thrown in the bin and forgotten about--when the dietary health problems remain? Britain has one of the highest levels of heart disease among comparable western nations, and we also have a higher rate of premature death in both men and women. Dietary causes are among the reasons. Should not the Government take real action by giving a much higher profile to dietary health education and forcing food producers to put less fat and salt in their products?
Mrs. Browning: The hon. Gentleman is such a dear old-fashioned thing. If he kept up to date with what is going on, he could not help noticing that the Government have produced "The Health of the Nation" White Paper, which not only comprehensively analyses what has happened, especially with regard to heart disease and fat intake in diet, but has set measurable targets. The food industry has been most helpful in trying to meet the targets. I do not know why all that has bypassed the hon. Gentleman, but that is what has actually been happening.
Sir Jerry Wiggin: In view of my hon. Friend the Minister's robust reply to my hon. Friend the Member for Colchester, North (Mr. Jenkin)--in which she rightly let us know that the Government are not seeking to interfere with the dietary requirements of
individuals--would it not be better to consign the report to the bin, since mass caterers unfortunately tend to read it, unlike the rest of the population who carry on regardless?
Mrs. Browning: Any member of the Government or the Opposition telling individuals what they should and should not eat is not the best way to influence them. We welcome the committee's report on nutritional aspects of cardiovascular disease as it provides a useful review of
Column 429
the science, and also suggests guidelines for dietary advice. People who are providing food for their families and themselves must take those decisions for themselves.Live Animal Exports
11. Mr. Luff: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what consideration he has given to the second report of the Welsh Affairs Committee on the export of live animals; and if he will make a statement. [20946]
Mrs. Browning: I welcome the Committee's thoughtful report, which rightly reflects the importance of a Community-wide agreement on animal welfare issues.
Mr. Luff: Does my hon. Friend recall the informative and persuasive evidence that she gave to the Committee on 8 March? Does she agree that the report clearly demonstrates the folly of giving in to anti-democratic forces, banning a legal trade, prejudicing the livelihoods of Welsh and other British farmers and--by destroying our influence in the debate in Europe--reducing, if not halting, progress towards an overall improvement in animal welfare standards?
Mrs. Browning: I hope that my hon. Friend will understand when I say that it would not be appropriate for me to comment in detail today on that excellent report as my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Wales will wish to comment in the usual way. We appreciate not only the Committee's report, but the support of others in recognising the need for a Europe-wide agreement on animal welfare, and on transport in particular. My right hon. Friend the Minister has worked tirelessly in seeking such an agreement. I am sure that hon. Members on both sides of the House will wish him well in his further negotiations at European Council meetings. This is the way forward in the protection of animals as we attempt to ensure that animal transport is of the highest possible quality.
Dr. Strang: Does the hon. Lady acknowledge that the Welsh Affairs Committee did not have the opportunity to see the recently published legal opinion from Gerald Barling QC, which was commissioned by the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and the International Fund for Animal Welfare? Since that opinion makes it clear that the Government can legally halt the export of calves to the continent, will Ministers stop using the European Union as an alibi and act to end the trade? How can it be right to export our calves into a system on the continent which is banned in this country on the ground of cruelty?
Mrs. Browning: My right hon. Friend the Minister has gone to great pains to study the legal advice in the Barling recommendations. We shall, of course, give our official response to that when lawyers have had a chance to look at it in more detail, and they are doing that at the moment. If the hon. Gentleman is telling the House today that the Labour party has accepted the Barling report, we would be interested to know how he has arrived at that assessment. It suggests that the hon. Gentleman is prepared to accept legal advice from a third party. If he had the responsibility, however, he would know only too well that that legal advice does not stand up.
Column 430
Fruit and Vegetable Regime
12. Sir Michael Neubert: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what efforts he is making to seek a wholesale review of the current European Union fruit and vegetable regime. [20947]
Mr. Jack: The Agriculture Council discussed the Commission's "reflections" documents last October and we are pressing for firm proposals to be submitted quickly.
Sir Michael Neubert: What action is my hon. Friend taking to ensure that the outcome of any such review will improve the competitive position of United Kingdom fruit and vegetable growers in Europe, particularly the growers of that peerless fruit the English apple, who are threatened by structural over-supply in Europe?
Mr. Jack: We have argued effectively for the complete dismantling of the so-called withdrawals mechanism, which is a waste of £500 million in Europe and causes over-production of apples, cauliflowers, tomatoes and other products where there is no clear market. For our part, we have assisted through various grants under the marketing development scheme. We also fought for the grubbing-up scheme to allow our apple industry to be restructured into a more competitive fighting force, to enable our apples to triumph on the supermarket shelves of this country.
Milk Quotas
13. Mr. Peter Atkinson: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what steps he is taking to ensure that European Community milk quota rules are changed to allow trading in quotas across member states' frontiers. [20948]
Mr. Waldegrave: We proposed the transferability of milk quotas between member states during the debate on common agricultural policy simplification, in last year's CAP price-fixing negotiations and in Council earlier this year, when I advocated transnational quota leasing. The European Court of Auditors made a similar recommendation two years ago, but there is, at present, no support for our ideas in the Council of Ministers.
Mr. Atkinson: Will my right hon. Friend keep on trying--it is essential for British dairy farmers and the dairy industry that he does so? Does he agree that it is wrong that farmers in member states who cannot use their quota should keep them, while farmers in this country are crying out for more?
Mr. Waldegrave: I strongly agree with the implication behind my hon. Friend's question. It would make an inherently unsatisfactory system slightly better if areas within the European Community where it is natural to produce milk were able to obtain quota from other areas. Many other countries, however--especially the remaining countries with socialist Governments--administer their quota because they like the centralised power that it gives their governmental organisation.
Dr. Strang: Will the right hon. Gentleman recognise that milk quotas, combined with the deregulation of the milk industry that the Government brought into operation on 1 November, are giving us the worst of all worlds, with milk being poured down the drain when we do not
Column 431
produce enough to meet our own needs, with hundreds of jobs being lost in our dairy plants and with the doorstep delivery system under threat? When will the Minister address those issues?Mr. Waldegrave: The hon. Gentleman is plainly pulling the House's leg. He understands these issues and he knows well enough that the doorstep delivery service has been in decline for 30 years or more. Furthermore, he will remember that when he was an Agriculture Minister the Treasury would not let him devalue the green pound at home, as a result of which British dairy farmers' prices were lower than anywhere else in the European Community. When 1981 was taken as the base year for quotas, we were systemically worse off than other countries in Europe. His party, although not the hon. Gentleman as I am sure he argued against the Treasury, bears a considerable share of the responsibility for the level of our quotas.
Fishing Offences
14. Mr. Harris: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how many successful prosecutions for fishing offences have been sustained in the past three years; and how many of these were against (a) Spanish and (b) Anglo-Spanish vessels. [20949]
Mr. Jack: In the last three years, 171, 182 and 135 vessels have been prosecuted, of which three, four and five respectively were Spanish registered and 16, 11 and 10 were United Kingdom registered landing into Spain.
Mr. Harris: I thank my hon. Friend for those figures. How on earth will we ensure effective policing from 1 January next year, when 40 Spanish vessels will be allowed into the waters of the Irish box? Will he give this House and, more particularly, the fishermen of the south-west of England an absolute assurance that we shall do everything in our power to ensure proper enforcement and that the Spanish do not get away with breaking all the rules in the book, which is what they have been doing until now?
Mr. Jack: My hon. Friend, who represents the fishing interests in his constituency with distinction, is right to make those points. Once the June Fisheries Council has agreed the final terms of the enforcement regime associated with the changed arrangements in western waters, we will carefully ensure that our resources are adequate for the job. As a result of keeping the Spanish out of the Irish sea and the Bristol channel, only one tenth of the portion of the Irish box that remains will be British territorial waters for the purposes of fishery protection. The remaining nine tenths will be policed by the Irish Republic and I can assure my hon. Friend that I will be in close contact with my opposite number in the Republic about joint arrangements to ensure full and effective enforcement.
Mrs. Ewing: I listened with interest to the statistics that the Minister gave, but will he tell us by whom the prosecutions were brought?
Mr. Jack: The prosecutions, when the coastal state involved was the United Kingdom, were brought by the United Kingdom Government.
Mr. John Townend: What influence does the Foreign Office have on the enthusiasm and the frequency with which we enforce fishing regulations on the Spanish fleet? Does the Minister understand why British fishermen are
| Next Section
| Home Page |