| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Peter L. Pike (Burnley): My right hon. Friend knows the appalling cost to the nation, to farmers and to all in the meat industry of the previous Government's appalling mishandling of the matter. Can he give the current figures for BSE incidence in herds? Will he make
it absolutely clear that it is the policy of his Department not to dodge the issues as the previous Government did, but to solve the problem as soon as possible?
Dr. Cunningham: My hon. Friend is right. The costs are horrendous: £1.5 billion and rising to the British taxpayer. Let me add that the previous Administration did not make sufficient provision in public expenditure to cover all the costs--just another of the little ticking time bombs that we have found in the public finances since the general election. The costs to the meat industry have also been catastrophic: some £800 million. The cost to farmers is almost incalculable. The financial consequences alone are truly horrendous.
The incidence of BSE, at the latest count on 4 June--my hon. Friend the Minister of State and I now have a weekly update of the figures--showed that there had been--[Hon. Members: "Reading".] Of course I am reading; I want to get the figure right. The figures showed that there had been 169,349 cases of BSE, which is currently running at 100 cases a week. That is a much reduced rate, but it is still much higher than in any other similarly affected country.
Mr. William Thompson (West Tyrone):
Does the right hon. Gentleman accept that this is very bad news for Northern Ireland, which exports a greater percentage of its meat than does any other part of United Kingdom? I understand that, while the overall scheme was rejected, favourable comments were made about its application--albeit with certain amendments--to Northern Ireland because of enhanced computer traceability in that part of the United Kingdom. Will the Minister insist that those amendments are made quickly and, when they are made, that the scheme be accepted for Northern Ireland, so that we can get rid of the iniquitous beef ban?
Dr. Cunningham:
I accept the hon. Gentleman's point about the critical importance of the matter to Northern Ireland's economy. The hon. Member for Upper Bann (Mr. Trimble) and his colleagues came to impress that point on me only a few days ago. We had a long conversation about the impact of BSE on farmers in Northern Ireland and the considerable significance of agriculture generally to Northern Ireland's economy: 75 per cent. of beef produced there used to be exported and cannot be now.
I am very well aware of the force of the hon. Gentleman's case, but he is wrong to describe the scheme as having been rejected. The scheme has not been rejected; questions have been asked about its particulars. The questions have not even been considered by the Commissioners yet. That is why I spoke on the telephone today to both Commissioners, to ask them to help us to answer the questions expeditiously and effectively so that the scheme can be accepted.
I want to make the best progress I can in dealing with those matters, certainly in the interests of farmers in Northern Ireland, but also in the interests of farmers in the United Kingdom as a whole. I acknowledge that there has been particularly good progress in Northern Ireland on registration, the selective cull and other matters necessary to fulfil the terms of the Florence agreement. If
I had not recognised that, the hon. Member for Upper Bann and his colleagues would have left me in no doubt about it.
Mr. Alan W. Williams (East Carmarthen and Dinefwr):
In line with the suggestions of the Scientific Veterinary Committee, will my right hon. Friend consider adopting a two-part strategy? First, as the hon. Member for West Tyrone (Mr. Thompson) said, he should press for an immediate lifting of the ban in Northern Ireland because of traceability. Secondly, for mainland Britain, he should work towards lifting restrictions on all cattle born after 1 August 1996, at which date we can guarantee that there was no contaminated beef. That would mean effectively a progressive lifting of the ban as those cattle reached 30 months.
Dr. Cunningham:
I hope that my hon. Friend will recognise that, if I could get results simply by insisting that the ban be lifted in Northern Ireland and elsewhere, I would so insist. It is not quite that simple. As there are questions about the certified herds scheme, which apply equally to Northern Ireland as to other parts of the United Kingdom, I must answer those questions to the advantage of Northern Ireland as well as other parts of the UK. As I have said repeatedly this afternoon, I want to do that as quickly and effectively as I can. The advantage of the certified herds scheme being approved is that it would apply to the whole of the UK, including Northern Ireland.
My hon. Friend's important second point was about a birth date after which we could export beef from anywhere in the UK. I have discussed that again with Commissioners Fischler and Bonino. I raised the matter with them in May and I discussed it again with Mr. Fischler today on the telephone. We are formulating new proposals along the lines suggested by my hon. Friend, and I shall keep the House informed of progress.
Mr. John Swinney (North Tayside):
It is rather difficult to get to the nub of the Secretary of State's statement. On the one hand, he is telling us that there are one or two problems with the scheme. On the other, he is saying that he is not giving us a definitive time scale within which the ban can be lifted. Will the Secretary of State give us some definitive guidance on how swift progress will be to have the beef ban lifted? Will he consider the proposals that have long been on the table, which have been endorsed by the European Union as an opportunity for the ban to be lifted in Scotland, as a priority within the United Kingdom?
Dr. Cunningham:
I do not want to fall out with anyone in the Chamber during my first appearance at the Dispatch Box in my present role in this Parliament. I say gently to the hon. Gentleman that I am not a Secretary of State but the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. Be that as it may, I am not being contradictory when I say that I want to resolve the problems as quickly as I can, but that I am not going to name a date. It would be unrealistic and misleading to do so. I have no idea how long it will take to resolve the problems. After all, the previous Prime Minister promised the nation that the entire ban would be lifted by November 1996. Here we are in June 1997 and none of the ban has been lifted.
It would be foolish in the extreme for me to start speculating about dates. I am certainly not going to raise false hopes. Perhaps that will disappoint the hon.
Gentleman and his constituents, but I recognise the nature and scale of the problems in Scotland because many of my right hon. and hon. Friends who represent Scottish constituencies, like the hon. Gentleman, have left me in no doubt about the importance of the matter to Scotland. I shall work as effectively and quickly as I can to resolve the problems, but I shall not speculate on how long that will take.
Mr. Paddy Tipping (Sherwood):
In addition to the terms of the Florence agreement, has my right hon. Friend any further proposals that will lead to the lifting of the beef ban? In particular, does he recognise that his recent comments about tightening import controls in the United Kingdom, unless common and improved standards of hygiene in slaughterhouses are introduced throughout Europe, have been widely welcomed by British beef producers?
Dr. Cunningham:
I am grateful to my hon. Friend. We are looking at other possibilities for action that would help in the lifting of the ban, either in part or in whole. I have already referred to one: a birth date after which any beef produced anywhere in the United Kingdom would be eligible for export. We have to deal with the outstanding matter of the scientific evidence on maternal transmission, and we need to bring forward proposals to the Commission on that important issue. We are working on those. I shall keep the House informed on that matter.
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his kind comments about the statement that I made last week. I have been quite emphatic about that statement. I want to see a European Union-wide approach to the removal of specified risk materials, but in the absence of such an approach, we shall act on our own account.
Mr. John Greenway (Ryedale):
May I offer support to the right hon. Gentleman for what he has said today about the need for the same hygiene standards and for the risk materials to be removed, having pressed that point in the House for 15 months? He will also know that I have always taken the view that this should be not a matter of dispute across the Floor of the House, but a matter between the House and this country, and the rest of the European Union.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |