| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Peter Hardy (Wentworth): Will the Minister remind his hon. Friends that the western European countries--indeed, any country--could impose a ban, and that, in the present situation, political skill and adequate initiative might lift that ban earlier than would be the case if we did not have an economic union?
Does the Minister understand that there is deep anxiety on this subject? I listened, and he may have listened, to farmers expressing on television their concern that they have heard nothing from the Ministry of Agriculture in recent weeks. They pointed out that we have not even had replies to questions of the sort that I asked the Minister two or three weeks ago--will animals be killed that have never been fed infected mammalian protein, in farms where there has been no death or case of BSE from animals that have never been fed that protein? A large number of dairy farms in this country are in that position, and the farmers have wrestled with acute anxiety for far too long.
Mr. Hogg:
The hon. Gentleman is right to imply that the European ban is not the only problem we face. There are a number of national bans across the world--including those erected by Commonwealth countries--which need to be addressed.
I accept that farmers need yet more information. We have placed a whole lot of stuff in the farming press, we have been in continuous and virtual daily contact with the farming unions, and I shall be sending written material to all farmers.
On the last part of the hon. Gentleman's question, his description of farms in his constituency explains why we are pushing for an exemption scheme to enable established herds of the sort that he described--but more than 30 months old and beef--to be allowed into the human food chain.
Mr. Richard Alexander (Newark):
Does my right hon. and learned Friend recall that, when he and I first came into politics, the European Union was known as the Common Market--a mutual trading organisation? By what right does that organisation now say, on no scientific grounds, not only that our beef cannot be sold in Europe, but that it cannot be sold anywhere else, either?
Mr. Hogg:
I share my hon. Friend's view that extending the prohibition--whether wholly or in part--to third countries, goes beyond the competence of the Union.
Mr. Robin Corbett (Birmingham, Erdington):
While it is right that the emphasis should be on the state of the beef market, what consideration has the Minister given to the impact of the proposed slaughter policy on the dairy industry? Is it likely to force up the doorstep price of a pint?
Mr. Edward Garnier (Harborough):
Does my right hon. and learned Friend accept that any case that he brings
Mr. Hogg:
That is obviously an important consideration.
Mrs. Alice Mahon (Halifax):
I declare an interest in public health. Public confidence has been badly affected by this debacle, and many people do not want to eat beef or feed it to their children. Is it not therefore important that the weaknesses in the current food labelling laws should be urgently addressed? Manufacturers are not required to identify the species origin of the meat used in their products. What plans does the Minister have to tackle that problem and to allay people's fears?
Mr. Hogg:
The essential question to ask is whether British beef is safe--to which the answer is yes. I do not honestly think that labelling has the slightest bearing on that issue.
Sir Donald Thompson (Calder Valley):
Have not my right hon. and learned Friend and his predecessors consulted the EU since 1987 on every step of BSE? Have not the veterinary committees and other committees in the Union been appraised of what we were doing, and have they not agreed with what we were doing? Does not the current hysteria point to commercial and political considerations, not scientific ones?
Mr. Hogg:
My hon. Friend has an extremely distinguished record in the field, having been a distinguished Minister in my Department, and what he has said has considerable force. There has been an endless dialogue between officials from the United Kingdom and those in the European Union. My hon. Friend is right to assert that most of the opposition we have been encountering has no justification, either in science or in logic.
Mr. George Foulkes (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley):
Is not the truth that, in spite of all the Minister's huffing and puffing and his dossier, in six weeks he has achieved nothing in terms of lifting any of the bans, including those imposed unilaterally by Commonwealth countries that have nothing to do with the European Union, while many of my constituents are continuing to lose their jobs? How long can the Minister continue in his job if he gets nowhere and still retain any degree of respect in the House?
Mr. Hogg:
As to respect in the House, that is for the House to decide. At Luxembourg, we put in place a process that is capable of leading to the lifting of the ban. The essential question we must face is whether member states will play a full and active part in response to Commission proposals that will enable that to occur.I express the earnest and profound hope that they will.
Mr. Patrick Nicholls (Teignbridge):
Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that an uncharitable assessment of the position is that all he can do in the present position is to ask, plead, beg and to cajole, but compel nothing? Does he agree that, if he and his right
Mr. Hogg:
This is a very grave matter. Therefore, it is incumbent on all who have policy responsibilities to ask ourselves what kinds of policies are most likely to result in a lifting of the ban. I have been pursuing a policy of persuasion and negotiation, and I believe that that is the right approach.
Mr. Ieuan Wyn Jones (Ynys Mon):
Does the Minister accept that the understandable frustration felt by farmers could now turn very easily into anger and despair at the delay in lifting the ban and lack of information about the slaughter policy? Will he do two things immediately? First, will he confirm that under no circumstances will the Government agree to the ban remaining in place until autumn this year? Secondly, will he confirm when the farmers will receive letters informing them about the collection points and the licensed abattoirs?
Mr. Hogg:
On the matter of information, the hon. Gentleman will know that, last week, three farming publications carried extensive information about the issue. In a few days, the Ministry will write to all farmers enclosing a very detailed information pack.
Mr. John Townend (Bridlington):
Will my right hon. and learned Friend accept that there is great disappointment in my constituency at his inability to announce the lifting of the ban? Our fishing industry has been savaged by the European fishing policy, and now the European Union has started on our dairy and beef industries. My right hon. and learned Friend has admitted that the ban is illegal, unjustified and unwarranted. Therefore, will he apply a time limit and tell our friends overseas that, if the ban is not lifted within three to four weeks, we shall take retaliatory action?
Mr. Hogg:
This is indeed a very serious matter, but we are all under an obligation to ask ourselves and one another what policies are most likely to bring about a speedy removal of the ban. The policies that I have outlined are those which I believe are most calculated to achieve that objective.
Mr. Tam Dalyell (Linlithgow):
Could we return to the desperately important question raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh, East (Dr. Strang) about the United Kingdom's scientific infrastructure? What is happening with the central veterinary laboratory, the central science laboratory and the neuropathogens laboratory in Edinburgh and the cuts in work that may be vital in identifying the root cause of the problem? The last time that he was at the Dispatch Box, the Minister said very courteously that he would look at the experiments conducted in Ames, Iowa, involving proteins 130 and 131, and the question of prions in sub-heated food.
Mr. Hogg:
Of course scientific research is important.I have discussed it on a number of occasions with Professor Pattison, the chairman of the Spongiform Encephalopathy Advisory Committee, to ascertain
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |