Previous SectionIndexHome Page


Mr. Paul Tyler (North Cornwall): The Minister knows that the Liberal Democrats have given cross-party support to the twin objectives of restoring consumer confidence and seeking to lift the ban in Europe. We welcome the Minister's statement, but our reaction is: why could it not have been made sooner? It is evident from the Minister's statement that many of the measures proposed in the package fall within United Kingdom Government jurisdiction, and do not depend upon the European Commission's approval.

Having said that, what has the Minister to say on the subject of the further delay for exempted breeds, which is obviously an extremely important point, given that cattle that have not had any potential exposure to contaminated feed must clearly, on the scientific evidence, be removed from any culling scheme? What will he tell those distraught farmers who are still waiting to hear what will happen? The Minister says that he seeks a scheme in the "longer term". What does he mean by that? What statutory powers does the Minister have to order the destruction of a healthy beef animal under animal disease legislation?

What representations has the Minister received from the farming unions on the level of compensation? Surely there should be compensation for the cull cow price before the crisis and before the market collapsed, rather than at the current level. The Minister will be aware that we support his overall objectives, but we shall be watching critically, as will the whole of rural Britain, to see how quickly the measures can be brought to speedy effect.

Mr. Hogg: I am pleased to get support wherever I can, even from the hon. Gentleman. The hon. Gentleman was more than a trifle churlish, but no matter--that was what I expected. He rebuked me for taking time, but, by their nature, some of these matters take time.

For example, it was important first to get the agreement of the Beef Management Committee to the 30-month scheme, as set out in the conclusions of the Agriculture Council. As I am sure the hon. Gentleman knows, the Beef

16 Apr 1996 : Column 520

Management Committee did not meet until the end of last week. It was important to get its agreement before going on to the next stage, which in this context is to work at the exemption scheme. I wanted to get the agreement of the Beef Management Committee to the broad proposition before producing proposals to derogate from it, for reasons that I imagine the hon. Gentleman will treat as good.

The hon. Gentleman referred to statutory powers, and I am satisfied that they exist. However, there is a problem regarding the top-up. In principle, it would be difficult to justify paying under the top-up scheme a higher price per kilo for beef going for destruction than the price per kilo for beef going into the market for human consumption. The economic consequences would be perverse, so we should be chary about doing that. That is why, on the top-up scheme and the rate of compensation, I expressed myself as I did.

Several hon. Members rose--

Madam Speaker: Order. The House has a great deal of business before it today, and I am simply asking for co-operation in brisk questions and brisk answers.

Mr. Robert Key (Salisbury): May I thank my right hon. and learned Friend and his ministerial team for providing the answers that we hoped to hear? I congratulate him on that.

Will he kindly consult our right hon. Friend the Chief Secretary and Inland Revenue officials on the knotty and difficult problem of tax? Farmers have a tight tax regime and, as I found when checked this morning, no special instruction has been given to collectors of tax on how to treat farmers, who are still receiving the same tax demands as they would under normal trading conditions. Associated industries are also under tight tax regimes and receive no helpful treatment, even when firms have been closed down directly as a result of the orders that my right hon. and learned Friend had to impose two weeks ago.

Mr. Hogg: I shall ensure that my hon. Friend's observations are brought to the attention of my right hon. Friend the Chief Secretary and my right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

Mr. John Home Robertson (East Lothian): I would like to hope that the Minister is in control of the situation, but I suspect that he is being driven by it. How many people are now out of work or on short time as a result of the Government's woeful handling of the crisis? Does he accept that the principal objective on which we should all agree is that BSE must be eradicated? Is that the Government's policy, and if not, why not?

Mr. Hogg: On unemployment, yes, people have been put on short time and have lost their jobs. That is a regrettable state of affairs. It has flowed for a variety of reasons, including a lack of consumer confidence. I repeat that the hon. Member for Peckham and others really have to face up to their responsibility for that.

On the eradication of BSE, the steps that we have already taken, in particular with regard to the changes in the constitution of animal feed--as the hon. Gentleman will know, we have excluded mammalian elements from the feed to be fed to all farm animals--will ultimately

16 Apr 1996 : Column 521

produce no BSE or a very low incidence of that disease. The figures are reducing dramatically and encouragingly. If it were possible in a highly targeted way substantially and cost-effectively to accelerate the process of eradication, the House might well consider that a desirable course of action.

Mr. Robert Jackson (Wantage): Does my right hon. Friend agree that a foolproof system of identification and tracing, including movements from birth to slaughter, and possibly electronic tagging, is an essential element in restoring consumer confidence at home and abroad?

Mr. Hogg: I do, and the Northern Irish can give us an example in that respect.

Mr. William Ross (East Londonderry): Does the Minister appreciate that farmers will be happy that, after this tortuous month, they now have some idea of their likely financial position? Would it not have been much wiser if the Minister had had a contingency plan prepared from last November in case the situation went wildly wrong, as has happened? Is the Minister aware that the scheme that he has formulated for cattle over 30 months old does not mention bull beef, only steers and heifers? What will happen to that class of animal?

Is the Minister further aware that, as the right hon. Member for Dumfries (Sir H. Monro) pointed out, there must be a large regional difference in the value of cull cows? Can the Minister tell farmers that some cognisance will be taken of that difference in the top-up scheme? Farmers in Northern Ireland will be down by £150 per head on pre-crisis prices.

Will the Minister ask the Leader of the House to arrange a debate on this complex and detailed statement, because it cannot be explored in the time that we have today?

Mr. Hogg: My right hon. Friend the Leader of the House will have heard what the hon. Gentleman has said. Of course, we have already had one debate on this subject, some two weeks ago.

On the subject of Northern Ireland, I have had great assistance from my noble Friend Lady Denton, and I am grateful for the way that the interests of Northern Ireland have been protected by her and my right hon. and learned Friend Secretary of State for Northern Ireland. In that context, I will listen to my noble Friend's views on the question of bull beef. The valuation of the cull cow is in fact prescribed in the European document.

Mr. James Couchman (Gillingham): My right hon. and learned Friend will be aware that his words will be widely welcomed by dairy and beef farmers, and also by the slaughterers. Will he think again about the manufacturers, such as the large pie factory in my constituency? Their businesses have been very substantially hit, and the employment of their employees is now very fragile. Since Mr. Fischler seems to think that British beef is safe, will my right hon. and learned Friend call in the bosses of McDonald's and Burger King and ask them to put their confidence in British beef and put it back into their products?

Mr. Hogg: I am conscious of the situation in my hon. Friend's constituency, and others, with regard to pie

16 Apr 1996 : Column 522

making. It was partly representations made by my hon. Friend that persuaded me of the need to lift the prohibition on imports into the United Kingdom from third countries where there was no BSE. My hon. Friend's representations had a considerable part to play in causing me to come to that decision, but I cannot go any further on the question of market support, which was the first point that my hon. Friend made. On the question of McDonald's and others, I and my hon. Friends in the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food have, on several occasions, met manufacturers' representatives, including McDonald's.

Mr. Dennis Skinner (Bolsover): Is the Minister aware that the Government have come a long way from the heady days of their philosophy of allowing the market to put everything right? In that regard, I remind him about the mining industry. The Government allowed every pit in Derbyshire to be closed, and refused to discuss subsidies.

Now that the Minister has crossed that great divide, will he turn his attention to the many people who have lost and will lose their jobs in this crisis, including those who transport the meat, and those in the food retail business--the workers? Can we have some guarantee that, if the Minister subsidises farmers, those in the slaughterhouses and the manufacturers, he will ensure that every worker who loses a job as a result of this Government crisis gets proper compensation?


Next Section

IndexHome Page