---

Food Safety

7. Mr. Hoyle: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what bodies and committees his Ministry consults regularly on food safety policies; and how many of these represent scientific interests. [13110]

Mr. Douglas Hogg: The Ministry of Agriculture takes advice on food safety issues from a wide range of advisory committees, most of which are able to advise on scientific issues.

Mr. Hoyle: Does the Minister remember that, 12 months ago, the Prime Minister rubbished the Labour party proposal to set up a food standards agency, yet his Department recently announced the setting up of a food safety council? Is that not another U-turn by his discredited Government? Is it not an attempt to steal Labour's clothes? Can he assure us that the council will not be a tame tabby cat for food companies but will instead defend the rights of the consumer?

Mr. Hogg: My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister rubbished Labour's proposals because they were rubbish, and they remain so, in so far as I understand them. The essential difference between our proposals and those that emanate from the Opposition is that, in so far as there is any substance in Labour's proposals, they combine the function of the implementing authority with that of the commentating supervisory authority. Such a body would commentate on that which it had done. We propose to separate those functions, so that Ministers are responsible for the implementation, setting and carrying through of policy, and for explaining it as and when necessary. The council and the adviser have a duty and ability to express in public their view on food safety, including the appropriateness of the policies of the Government of the day. That is by far the most effective way of reassuring the public.

Sir Irvine Patnick: I congratulate my right hon. and learned Friend on setting up the food safety committee. Will he now direct his attention to other food committees, and especially to the Spongiform Encephalopathy Advisory Committee? What will he do about that?

Mr. Hogg: I thank my hon. Friend for his congratulations, which are always happily received. We want to find ways of yet further reinforcing the authority of the specialist advisory committees, and we shall do so in the context of the proposal for the food safety council. We are examining SEAC's terms of reference, and its structure, membership and operation, with special regard to the points that my right hon. Friend the Health Secretary and I made on March 20.

Mrs. Golding: When did the Minister first realise that the public had lost confidence in his ability to deal with food safety?

Mr. Hogg: I have recognised for some time--

Mrs. Golding: Too little, too late.

Mr. Hogg: I am answering the question. I have no reason to be less than candid with the House. I have

6 Feb 1997 : Column 1135

recognised for some time that the public--this has probably been true for many years--has been rather sceptical about what Ministers and officials say about food safety. I have addressed that problem robustly and vigorously by proposing to set up an independent adviser and an independent council. I look forward to support from the hon. Lady because I am meeting her anxieties.

Common Fisheries Policy

9. Mr. Amess: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what recent representations he has received about reforming the European fisheries policy. [13113]

Mr. Baldry: I have recently received a wide range of representations about reforming the European fisheries policy, including proposals from my hon. Friend the Member for Basildon (Mr. Amess).

Mr. Amess: Does my hon. Friend welcome the news that Emma Bonino, at a meeting with my hon. Friend the Member for Castle Point (Dr. Spink), local Essex fishermen and me, agreed with our criticism of the common fisheries policy and said that it needed urgent reform? Will he also reflect on the recent meeting with local Essex fishermen and, in particular, on their point about regional management?

Mr. Baldry: Everyone agrees, including Emma Bonino, that the common fisheries policy needs reforming. I welcomed the opportunity of meeting Essex fishermen with my hon. Friend. I am considering the points that they put to me and if, as I suspect, I conclude that different arrangements need to be put in place on the temporary closure of the North sea sole fishery, I shall consult the industry. I am well aware of the problems facing non-sector fisherman in Essex and elsewhere, which is why we introduced, in 1995, underpinning or guaranteed minimum quota allocations for non-sector fisheries, including North sea sole and cod. For 1997, I have extended underpinning to a wider range of stocks important to non-sector fishermen, such as North sea plaice and whiting, because I want to ensure that the fishermen of Essex and elsewhere have a viable future.

Dr. Godman: One much-needed reform would be a complete ban on industrial fishing. Does the Minister agree that industrial fishing is deeply harmful, particularly to juvenile members of commercially valuable species? Does he also agree that our once-rich seas are being swept clean, and one of the major culprits is the industrial fishing vessel?

Mr. Baldry: It was for exactly those reasons that I pressed successfully in the Fisheries Council for measures to reduce herring mortality in industrial fisheries. Just as importantly, I pressed to include industrial fisheries in the first tranche of activities, subject to satellite monitoring, and insisted that industrial fisheries had a much higher position in the next round of decommissioning. It is crazy that the Commission's proposals for decommissioning did not adequately have regard to industrial fishing and its impact in the North sea and elsewhere.

6 Feb 1997 : Column 1136

Mr. Bellingham: Has the fisheries Minister heard recent reports of fishermen who have been out fishing in the Wash for sprat and have caught herring, which, under CFP rules, must be thrown back into the sea dead? Is that not yet another reason why the CFP needs root and branch reform?

Mr. Baldry: We always have difficulty with mixed fisheries such as we have around our coasts. The whole question of discards causes understandable offence and we must constantly try to find policies that minimise the need for discards.

Cattle Cull

10. Dr. Lynne Jones: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will make a statement on the storage of slaughtered cattle. [13114]

Mr. Baldry: To speed up clearance of the backlog of cattle that were awaiting slaughter under the over-30-months scheme, some 69,000 tonnes of cattle remains, excluding specified bovine material, were placed in cold storage pending the availability of rendering capacity. In addition, dry storage is being used for scheme material that has already been rendered pending its destruction.

Dr. Jones: Who is paying the £250,000 weekly cost of that storage? Less than 4 per cent. of the cattle have been disposed of properly by incineration. What is the Minister doing to reduce that cost, and to allay the anxiety that meat from those carcases--thousands of carcases kept in cold storage--could find its way into butchers' shops?

Mr. Baldry: It is helpful to remember that any cattle that exhibit clinical signs of BSE are disposed of immediately by direct incineration, and that specified bovine material is removed from all scheme cattle and sent direct for rendering, so no specified bovine material has been placed in cold storage. The use of cold storage was necessary to clear the backlog of OTMS cattle as quickly as possible and to maximise the use of a limited rendering capacity. Speed was of the essence to avoid potential animal welfare problems on farms as winter drew near, and to pave the way for a start to selective culling. The backlog is now cleared; no more material is being put into cold store, and clearly we shall get rid of the material in cold storage and get it rendered as speedily as is humanly possible.

The use of dry storage for rendered material was unavoidable pending a valuation of the best option for the destruction of that material. In deciding on the best option, full regard will obviously be given to protecting human health and the environment.

Mr. Garnier: Is there sufficient storage for, or the capacity to dispose of, any cattle slaughtered under the accelerated slaughter scheme?

Mr. Baldry: Yes. I do not see the accelerated slaughter scheme in any way making more difficult our disposal problems with the over-30-months scheme.

6 Feb 1997 : Column 1137

Food Safety

11. Mr. Heppell: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what representations he has received in the past six months from consumer groups on his policies on food safety; and if he will make a statement. [13115]

Mrs. Browning: We have had meetings and correspondence with a number of consumer groups on various food safety issues.

Mr. Heppell: Will the Minister confirm that, following the announcement of the intention to establish a food safety council, the majority of responses from consumer groups have said that the proposals are inadequate and do not go far enough? Will the Minister tell the House why those same consumer bodies were not consulted before the announcement instead of afterwards?

Mrs. Browning: My right hon. and learned Friend this afternoon gave the House a clear outline as to the independence of that food safety adviser and the council that he or she will chair. We believe that here at the Dispatch Box is the right place for Ministers to be accountable and to defend their policy--but if they get the policy wrong, or if the experts believe that they have not implemented it properly, they will be called to book and that will be done publicly. I am always interested to hear the views of consumer bodies, to which we speak on a regular basis, but that independence is key.

---