| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
9.40 pm
The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Mrs. Angela Browning): It is evident from the contributions this evening that the House is greatly concerned about the future of the beef industry and the trades associated with it. Clearly and rightly, all hon. Members who have contributed expect and demand that the Government--to use the NFU's words--"pull out all the stops" to improve and ultimately resolve the situation. If that had been the tone of the motion before the House, we could have taken the Liberal Democrats' contribution more seriously.
I regret that the Liberal Democrats' motion was based not on their concern for the farmers, the beef industry or the trades associated with it, but on a disgraceful attack on the Minister of Agriculture on a day when they know that he cannot be present. I do not question their challenge to Ministers on Government policy, but they are becoming well known for personal smears and underhand tactics that debase the politics and democracy of this country. [Interruption.] The Liberal Democrats can chatter all they like. They have had their say this evening and they chose the ground on which to bring this important subject before the House. It is contemptible, especially for people who purport to represent the agriculture industry, to bring such an important subject to the House under the guise of challenging someone who cannot be here to represent himself. As if that were not enough, at Prime Minister's Question Time today, the leader of the Liberal Democrats complained to the Prime Minister about the tone of British politics. That is typical.
The leader of the Liberal Democrats has attacked the policy of non-co-operation--and his troops have spoken on the same theme this evening--on the grounds that it not would deliver a framework and that Britain's standing in Europe would be irreparably damaged. He is wrong on both counts. We now have a clear framework for lifting the ban, which we would not have if we had not acted as we did.
Britain's reputation was being damaged by the bad faith and blocking tactics used by other member states. The Prime Minister went to international conferences at which Heads of Government publicly gave him support only to find, when the vote came, that the Ministers and vets of those countries reneged on their promises. There is a limit to how many times that can be acceptable to any Government. It may be acceptable to a Government that the Liberal Democrats envisage in their grandiose scheme for a federal Europe, but it was not in the interests of this country. The Government and the Prime Minister were not prepared to sell this country down the river.
The framework agreed in Florence has met the Ashdown test. In a letter to the Prime Minister on 22 May, the right hon. Member for Yeovil (Mr. Ashdown) said:
Mrs. Browning:
Because we in the Conservative party work as a team, something which the Liberal Democrats purport to do, but cannot recognise when they see it in practice.
Three months ago, the hon. Member for North Cornwall (Mr. Tyler) called for all dairy cattle that could have had access to BSE-infected foodstuffs--cattle born before 1991--to be taken out of the food chain. In his press release issued on 26 March, he proposed a selective cull that could be spread over a full year. Given his commitment only a few weeks ago, I trust that he will support a selective cull just three months later.
We look forward to the hon. Gentleman and his party supporting that policy, because at the moment my hon. Friend the Minister of State and other colleagues of ours in the Department are working closely with the agriculture industry--
Mr. Campbell-Savours:
That is a south-west matter.
Mrs. Browning:
No, it is not a south-west matter. Many areas have a lot of animals that will come under the scheme.
We, and my hon. Friend the Minister of State in particular, are working closely with and formally consulting the industry, the NFU and the farming interests to determine how that policy can be taken forward. Given the written commitment of the hon. Member for North Cornwall to the policy, we look to him to play his part, and for his support, in getting right the details of the policy that will help in the lifting of the ban by the autumn, certainly its first stages.
The hon. Member for Edinburgh, East (Dr. Strang) made a constructive contribution. Throughout the debates on the subject, his contributions have been informed and certainly a lot more rational than those of the hon. Member for North Cornwall and his colleagues. However, on occasions, he is let down by his colleagues. The hon. Member for Peckham (Ms Harman) has not helped his cause. Tonight he asked the House to keep a sense of perspective by looking at the science and not creating scares over BSE and CJD. He is right to do so. I fully support his words and I hope that they will have been heard by his own colleagues and by other hon. Members.
The hon. Gentleman has also been let down by the leader of the Labour party, who I regret has not had the benefit of listening to him perhaps as much as Conservative Members have. The right hon. Member for Sedgefield (Mr. Blair) shows the two faces of the Labour
party on this issue. Here in Great Britain, the official Labour party's policy is, as the hon. Member for Livingston (Mr. Cook) said, that
Mr. Marlow:
My hon. Friend probably remembers, as I do, a famous "Spitting Image" puppet of the then leader of the Liberal party stuck in the top pocket of the then leader of the Social Democratic party. Does the relationship between the leader of the Labour party and Chancellor Kohl remind her of that?
Mr. Deputy Speaker:
Order. I do not know what "Spitting Image" has to do with the debate.
Mrs. Browning:
I am probably too young to remember that.
We have heard constructive, concerned and well-informed contributions, particularly from my right hon. Friend the Member for Dumfries (Sir H. Monro) and my hon. Friends the Members for Weston-super-Mare (Sir J. Wiggin) and for West Gloucestershire (Mr. Marland). My hon. Friend the Member for Ludlow (Mr. Gill) concentrated on the European element of what we have had to negotiate. We also heard interesting speeches from my hon. Friends the Members for Wolverhampton, South-West (Mr. Budgen) and for Gosport (Mr. Viggers). My hon. Friend the Member for Gosport has been to see me; I know that he is very concerned about the position of head boners, particularly those in his constituency. As he is aware, I am examining that again. I do not wish to give him any indication that the decision can be reversed, but, as I promised, I have looked at it and will continue to look at it. I shall return to him as soon as I have done that.
My hon. Friend the Member for Gainsborough and Horncastle (Mr. Leigh) and my hon. Friend and neighbour the Member for Teignbridge (Mr. Nicholls) made important and persuasive speeches.
Mr. Malcolm Bruce:
The Minister is persuaded only by her own side.
"The test for your gamble"--
non-co-operation--
"does not lie in lifting the derivatives ban . . . But in whether the outcome is an agreement on lifting the overall European beef ban by the end of June."
25 Jun 1996 : Column 248
That has been achieved. The Government secured an agreement at the Florence Council on 21 June. The idea that simply mentioning the names of Ministers met during a quick tour of Europe, albeit for short briefings, would have produced a much more substantial agreement, is arrogant even by Liberal Democrat standards.
Mr. Tyler:
I am grateful to the Minister for giving way in her customary polite fashion. If the Minister of Agriculture and the hon. Lady's colleague have done such a wonderful job, why did the Prime Minister decide to appoint the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster to take charge of the 30-month cull and the Foreign Secretary to take over the leadership of the negotiations in Europe?
"the Government has adopted a policy of non-co-operation in Europe as its chosen means of ending the ban. Labour will give them our support in the national interest."
That was in May. We support and welcome that. However, it was disappointing to find that when the right hon. Member for Sedgefield was in Germany on 18 June, a week ago, he said:
"You should also know that no one has been more critical of our Government's handling of the BSE crisis than the Labour Party."
The right hon. Gentleman's words are not compatible with what the hon. Member for Edinburgh, East said at the Dispatch Box. There have been times when he has been critical, but in the main we have welcomed the support of the Opposition Front-Bench agriculture spokesman. I hope that the leader of the Labour party will refer to the hon. Gentleman's words.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |