Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
12. Mr. Lansley: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will make a statement on the renegotiation of the common agricultural policy. [2902]
Dr. John Cunningham: The need for CAP reform is widely recognised and is a major priority for the Government. A redirection of the CAP away from high prices and production controls is essential if EU agriculture is to remain competitive and dynamic in the face of the liberalisation of world trade and the effects of EU enlargement.
Mr. Lansley: In response to an earlier question, the Minister of State said that he was not in favour of modulation. Will the Minister go further and say that he will reject any proposal for CAP reform that incorporated modulation?
Dr. Cunningham: I can go further still and say that I will reject any proposals that come up under the CAP that would disadvantage British farmers.
On modulation, to which I am totally opposed, I would not want a scheme to be introduced that discriminated unfairly against the UK generally and our efficient large farmers in particular.
Mr. Pike:
I recognise that my right hon. Friend has quite rightly identified the problems of enlargement in relation to the CAP, but what discussions are the Government having with those nations that might join the EU at some future date, such as Poland and Romania, whose agricultural economies would have a grave effect on the CAP's future?
Dr. Cunningham:
That is principally a matter for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs. Those matters are being discussed not only by my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary but by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister in the context of the intergovernmental conference and the wider debate about EU enlargement, which we support.
Mrs. Ewing:
Given that not much progress seems to have been made on the issue of EU enlargement at the Amsterdam summit, and that reform of the CAP has to a great extent hinged on that issue, will the right hon. Gentleman advise the House, especially those of us who represent agricultural communities, how negotiations and discussions will take place? Enlargement is linked with the development of structural and regional funds, particularly for less-favoured areas. The issue is important to all of us who represent rural constituencies. I would like to hear Government Front Benchers send the message today that negotiations and discussions will take place in a positive fashion.
Dr. Cunningham:
If the hon. Lady is asking for an assurance that we will adopt a positive approach to discussions and negotiations on EU enlargement, I can give her that without hesitation. Not to be able at the same time to seek fundamental reforms of the CAP would be damaging for us and, in the long term, the EU's structure would become unstable because an enlarged union would not be able to finance the current CAP.
13. Mr. Clapham:
To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what plans he has to improve the long-term prospects of farmers in less-favoured areas; and if he will make a statement. [2903]
Mr. Morley:
My right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food is well aware of the problems of farming in the less-favoured areas as his constituency includes less-favoured areas. The concerns of hill farmers will be fully taken into account in the development of policy affecting rural areas.
Mr. Clapham:
I congratulate my hon. Friend on his appointment to the Front Bench. In this afternoon's debate on the CAP, will he urgently address the issue of reform? Will he consider the ways in which the CAP is wasteful and unfair and how to redirect any resources saved as a result of reforms towards hill farmers and farmers in less-favoured areas such as those in my constituency?
Mr. Morley:
I am aware that my hon. Friend represents some less-favoured areas. This is an important matter. Farmers in marginal areas should be supported. They will have expected to receive £650 million last year in subsidies for LFAs, which is equivalent to about £26,000 for each full-time LFA English cattle and sheep farmer. We intend to support those communities and we will ensure that their interests are protected in any reform of the CAP.
29. Mr. Ian Bruce: To ask the Attorney-General what measures he plans to introduce to reduce the time taken by the Crown Prosecution Service to bring cases to court. [2920]
The Attorney-General (Mr. John Morris): The Narey report put forward a number of proposals for reducing delay in the courts. The public consultation ended on 31 May and the Government are now looking closely at the proposals in light of the responses that they have received.
Mr. Bruce: I welcome the Attorney-General to his post. He faces a difficult situation in ensuring that the bottlenecks that have been identified in the CPS are sorted out. The right hon. and learned Gentleman will be surprised to know that his colleagues in the Home Office told me, when I stressed to them that resources should go from the Home Office to his Department to get the
CPS moving, that they believe that the CPS has sufficient resources and that all that is needed is good management. Does the right hon. and learned Gentleman agree?
The Attorney-General: I thank the hon. Gentleman for his kind words. I have to disappoint him, because there are no additional resources. As the hon. Gentleman will know, we have set up an independent review, whose terms of reference have been made known to the House. That may deal with some of the anxieties expressed by the hon. Gentleman in the latter part of his question.
Dr. Iddon: Will my right hon. and learned Friend please assure the House that the CPS will inform victims or relatives of victims when serious charges are downgraded, and give reasons for such downgrading?
The Attorney-General: The first part of my hon. Friend's suggestion, which I regard as particularly important, is under active consideration. As for the assertion that there has been undue downgrading, that will be considered, among other matters, by the independent review. I welcome my hon. Friend's observations.
Sir Nicholas Lyell: I congratulate the right hon. and learned Gentleman on his appointment, and the Solicitor-General, in another place, on his. In that context, however, I note that, even with 418 Members, new Labour cannot find two Law Officers in this House.
In seeking to reduce the time that cases take to come to court--which the Opposition support--the Labour party has pledged to halve the time for persistent young offenders. What is the average current time that the right hon. and learned Gentleman proposes to halve?
On the proposal that the CPS, rather than the police, informs victims of prosecuting decisions--extra work, of course--who will do that work, and has the Attorney-General been promised the necessary resources by the Home Secretary or the Chancellor?
The Attorney-General:
First, I thank the right hon. and learned Gentleman for his kind words. In all the time that he held the office that I now have the honour to hold, he was unfailing in his courtesy and in the assistance that he gave me over the years, for which I thank him.
As regards the absence of another Law Officer, I am confident that the other place will be exceedingly well served by my hon. and learned Friend the Solicitor-General--[Interruption.] I hear the comment from below the Gangway that one of ours is better than two of theirs. It would be very immodest of me to subscribe to that view, and I do not do so.
Much concern has been expressed about young offenders. I have expressed concern, as have my colleagues who take part in Home Affairs debates. The problem at the moment is that young offender cases may be referred to multi-agency panels or juvenile liaison bureaux before a decision on charging is made. That undoubtedly takes a lot of time. We want to shorten the time considerably to ensure that those against whom allegations of offending are made are brought to court speedily. The Government have set up a ministerial group on the fast-tracking of youth offenders. We will consider exceedingly urgently what can be done.
30. Mr. Winnick:
To ask the Attorney-General what are his proposals in respect of the prosecution of Mr. Asil Nadir in the United Kingdom. [2921]
The Attorney-General:
The central criminal court has issued a warrant for the arrest of Asil Nadir, and Interpol has been informed. The Serious Fraud Office intends to proceed against him on charges of theft when he returns, or is returned, to the jurisdiction.
Mr. Winnick:
I do not suppose that Nadir mistook Turkey for Torquay.
I, too, welcome the Attorney-General to his position. What are the realistic chances that Asil Nadir will be brought to justice in this country? Will the Attorney-General promise today that he will try to persuade whoever is elected leader of the Tory party that all the stolen money that Nadir gave to the Tory party should be given to the appropriate authorities dealing with the liquidation? Would that not demonstrate that the Tory party is committed to the rule of law in practice?
The Attorney-General:
I am sure that my hon. Friend is right to say that Turkey is not Torquay and that Mr. Nadir did not mistake the two places.
My hon. Friend will be aware that the Turkish authorities were requested by Interpol to arrest Nadir if he was found in Turkey. However, since Nadir is able to claim Turkish nationality and the Turkish constitution forbids the extradition of its nationals, the authorities there declined to arrest him. Therefore, I cannot, I fear, add to my hon. Friend's substantive point by giving him any realistic prospect as to when Nadir will be returned to the jurisdiction. Let me make it known--as my predecessor did--that, if Nadir does come here, he has nothing to fear from the English courts as regards a fair trial, which he will get at any time.
As for the use of any money given to any party, I have no responsibility for that whatever, and I am glad to say that.
Mr. Streeter:
I also welcome the Attorney-General to his Front-Bench position. Does he recall that, when he and his colleagues were on the Opposition Benches, they used to maintain week after week that it was a very simple matter to get Asil Nadir returned to this country, and that the only reason why the Government did not achieve it was the alleged connection with party funding? Now that he and his colleagues are in government, why can he not be more decisive in solving a problem that he thought was so simple when he was in opposition? Has the legal position changed, or has the Labour party stumbled on the truth?
The Attorney-General:
The hon. Gentleman is drawing on his imagination if he thinks for one moment that I ever suggested that this was a simple matter. As a lawyer, he must know the law and the extradition procedure. We do not recognise northern Cyprus, and therefore no extradition arrangement is in force. I have just told the House the present position on Turkey, and I have nothing to add. The legal position has not changed, as, I am sure the hon. Gentleman knows.
Mr. John D. Taylor:
Did the Attorney-General see "The Cook Report" television programme on Asil Nadir,
The Attorney-General:
I can assure the right hon. Gentleman that I did not have the advantage of seeing that television programme--like many of us in this place, I did not have the time. However, I have received a full report on the programme which, I am told, did not present an accurate or balanced picture of the investigation into Polly Peck International plc. I can add nothing to that. It would be wrong for me or the SFO to comment on that case any further, because the matter is obviously sub judice.
Next Section
| Index | Home Page |