House of Commons
Thursday 17 July 1997
The House met at half-past Two o'clock
PRAYERS
[Madam Speaker in the Chair]
Oral Answers to Questions
AGRICULTURE, FISHERIES AND FOOD
Food Standards Agency
1. Ms Shipley: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what preparations his Department is making for the establishment of a food standards agency. [7274]
The Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Dr. Jack Cunningham): My Department, with the Department of Health and other interested Departments, is working towards publication of a White Paper in the autumn, which will set out the Government's proposals for the food standards agency. We have already made changes to the organisation of the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food to prepare for the agency.
Ms Shipley: Many of my constituents in Stourbridge have raised the issue of food standards and safety with me, both before and after the general election. Can my right hon. Friend be more specific about publication of the White Paper and tell me what food standards measures his Department is implementing in the interim?
Dr. Cunningham: We have already conducted preliminary consultations on Professor James's report. My Department is now analysing the responses to that consultation. We shall draft the White Paper and make it available to the House and the public as soon as we possibly can. I am working with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Health on appropriate interim arrangements to ensure that, if necessary, we can expeditiously deal with any food health problems that may arise.
Mrs. Spelman: Does the Minister agree that a Cabinet Minister should retain ultimate responsibility for food safety in the United Kingdom?
Dr. Cunningham: The food standards agency will be an independent executive agency. It will report to the Secretary of State for Health.
Dr. Gibson: Does my right hon. Friend agree that development of the food standards agency will require the support of world-class research into the food sciences?
If he does, will he consider a visit to the Institute of Food Research, in Norwich, as a part of the essential process of establishing a food standards agency?
Dr. Cunningham: Yes. As a scientist myself, I am absolutely certain that any decisions that we make on the matter should be based on the very best possible scientific analysis and advice. In answer to my hon. Friend's second question, yes, I will try to visit his constituents in Norwich.
Mr. Baldry: Doubtless the Minister will want the maximum openness and transparency on the issue. Will he, therefore, kindly undertake to place in the Library the responses to Professor James's consultation, so that hon. Members may have some good reading over the long recess? Will he also consider following the excellent example of the Secretary of State for International Development, who, before publication of her White Paper, held a debate in the House in Government time? May we have a debate, in Government time, before publication of the White Paper on the food standards agency?
Dr. Cunningham: On the first part of the question, I should tell the Gentleman that there have been more than 600 responses to the consultation. In the interests of openness and transparency, I think that I can say--although that has a certain European parliamentary ring about it--that, yes, I will place copies in the Library. On the second part of the hon. Gentleman's question, debates in Government time are a matter for my right hon. Friend the President of the Council.
Genetically Engineered Crops
2. Dr. Lynne Jones: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what plans he has to ensure that genetically engineered crops are separated from the main crop. [7276]
The Minister of State, Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Mr. Jeff Rooker): Under World Trade Organisation rules, it is not possible for Governments to demand segregation of genetically modified crops that have been approved as safe. Manufacturers and retailers, however, are free to pursue segregation on commercial grounds. Many United Kingdom supermarkets are demanding ever greater product traceability from their suppliers. There is no reason why they cannot do the same with genetically modified crops.
Dr. Jones: Does my hon. Friend agree that the public's right to have their food labelled with pertinent information is more important than the rights of multinational food companies to make large profits by claiming that they are unable to separate genetically modified crops from the main crop? Will he use his best endeavours to ensure that such labelling occurs?
Mr. Rooker: The answer to both my hon. Friend's questions is yes.
Hill Livestock Compensatory Allowances
3. Mr. Collins: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will make a statement about the operation of hill livestock compensatory allowances. [7277]
The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Mr. Elliot Morley): In England, 98 per cent. of claims under the 1997 scheme were paid by the target date of 30 April. The 1998 scheme is now open for cattle claims, and the application period for sheep claims will be open as usual in December.
Mr. Collins: Does the Parliamentary Secretary agree that much of the beauty of areas such as the Lake district depends on the hard work of hill farmers? Is he aware that, with sheep prices now falling and the continuing and accelerating difficulties in the beef sector, many hill farmers in my constituency and elsewhere are facing genuine problems? Will he therefore look with sympathy on their case for an uprating of HLCAs in the coming year?
Mr. Morley: HLCAs are indeed an important support package for farmers in the uplands. However, I have to point out that when the Tory party was in government it made no provision for the £60 million that it gave to the beef sector in the uplands this year. That £60 million is not in next year's accounts, which will cause some difficulty in providing support through HLCAs.
Mr. Curry: Would not the review of the upland payments be easier if the Government acted now to prevent the damage it will inflict on the incomes of hill farmers, and beef suckler herds in particular, and withdrew the ill-founded proposal to put a 560 kg weight limit on the animals eligible for culling? Does he not realise that that alone could cost hill farmers--honest hill farmers, not those out to fiddle the system--up to £150 per beast? With the next green pound revaluation now imminent, why does the Parliamentary Secretary not do what the Ministers of eight other countries have already done and go to Brussels to get the compensation to which he is entitled for his farmers, who will otherwise suffer?
Mr. Morley: May I first welcome the right hon. Gentleman to his first Question Time in his new role? I repeat: if the previous Government felt that support for the suckler sector was so important, why did they make no provision for the £60 million in the Ministry's budget next year? It is true that there is hardship for the suckler sector because of the changes that have been made, but the Opposition spokesman will be aware that the total cost of bovine spongiform encephalopathy support is £3.5 billion of public money, spending for which the previous Administration bear some responsibility because of their incompetence.
Mr. Curry: Does the hon. Gentleman not realise that, since this Government came to power, there have been two major green pound revaluations, because the Chancellor let go of control of interest rates, and a third is imminent? As farmers are suffering severe income loss as a result, are they not entitled to get compensation from Brussels? Why does the hon. Gentleman not do what eight
of his colleagues at the Council of Ministers are doing and get that benefit for his farmers--or does he not care enough?
Mr. Morley: In relation to the revaluation of the green pound, my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food has already met a delegation of farmers from the National Farmers Union and made it clear that we are considering that point.
Meat Hygiene Service
4. Mr. Bayley: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will make a statement about the future of the Meat Hygiene Service. [7278]
Dr. Jack Cunningham: The Government are looking carefully at the options for the future of the Meat Hygiene Service following the consultation exercise on Professor James's report into the establishment of an independent food standards agency. The report itself recommends that the new agency should take over responsibility for the Meat Hygiene Service.
Mr. Bayley: I thank my right hon. Friend for that useful answer. I, too, think that the Meat Hygiene Service should become part of the agency. My right hon. Friend will be aware that York is not just Britain's but Europe's biggest centre for bioscience and has many agencies from his Department other than the Meat Hygiene Service--for example, the Pesticides Safety Directorate and the Central Science Laboratory. Would he like to come to York to see what they contribute to food safety, and will he give me an assurance that, wherever the headquarters of the new food standards agency is based, the Meat Hygiene Service will remain in York?
Dr. Cunningham: I very much hope that my hon. Friend remains in York, too, as the Member of Parliament. No proposal has been made, by Professor James or anyone else, to relocate the Meat Hygiene Service. I can assure my hon. Friend on that point. In the coming months, I will try hard to visit him and his constituents in York.
Mr. Clifton-Brown: Does the Minister consider that the food standards agency should adopt the role of regulator of the Meat Hygiene Service, which should remain? Does he also believe that it is in the interests of the public that we have the highest possible standards of hygiene and that the consumer deserves nothing less from products coming in from Europe?
Dr. Cunningham: The food standards agency will subsume the Meat Hygiene Service and its necessary activities. I certainly agree that we must drive up standards of hygiene in food generally and in the meat industries in particular. I hope that my European ministerial colleagues at next week's Council of Ministers vote to implement the same rigorous controls over specified beef risk materials that we have in this country. As I have told the House on more than one occasion, if they do not, I shall table orders in the House to ensure that beef imported to Britain is subject to those rigorous controls.
Mr. David Heath: Is the Minister aware that some of the abattoirs that have worked most closely with the Meat
Hygiene Service and offer the best levels of hygiene and welfare facilities have been inexplicably excluded from the over-30-months cull? That is causing enormous difficulties for farmers, agents and hauliers throughout my constituency and, I think, in most of the country. Will he intervene to avoid another agricultural crisis?
Dr. Cunningham: I am not aware of any impending crisis. The scheme, which, as I am sure that the hon. Gentleman knows, is administered by the Intervention Board, is subject to competitive tendering to ensure that we get the best value for the large amounts of taxpayers' money involved, running to hundreds of millions of pounds.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |