| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Cattle Breeders
6. Mr. Swayne: What representations he has received from breeders of traditional native breeds of cattle with slow rates of growth. [12614]
Mr. Rooker: I have received a small number of representations from breeders of such animals.
Mr. Swayne: Is the Minister aware that ecologists agree that the best way to maintain the unique character of the New Forest is to have it grazed by suckler cows? Is he also aware that, because of the quality of the ground, such beasts will be in their third year before they can be sold as store? Will he therefore distance himself from the disgraceful remarks made by the Minister of Agriculture on Tuesday when he accused farmers of cheating on the schemes for compensation for BSE?
Mr. Rooker: I will attempt to address the hon. Gentleman's question of substance, because there is a genuine problem for breeders of native breeds of cattle with slow rates of growth such as Galloway, Welsh black and Highland. The beef assurance scheme was fixed up so that such cattle can come to market at between 30 and 42 months. I regret that there are only 73 registered members of that scheme, so it has not been a success. That does not meet the issues raised in the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question, but it meets those raised in his original question of substance.
Mr. Dalyell: My hon. Friend is completely right to say that it is a genuine problem. Will the Ministry take into account not only any romantic advantage of Highland or other special breeds but their value to the gene pool? Will the Ministry look at the issue from the point of view of long-term genetic advantage to the British cattle herd?
Mr. Rooker: I do not know how many of the 73 herds in the scheme are in Scotland, but my hon. Friend's point is correct. One of the reasons for the beef assurance scheme was to ensure that farmers with special breeds did not suffer and that the nation did not suffer by losing those breeds.
Mr. Paice: Does the Minister accept that the three breeds that he just cited are all hill breeds? Is it not absolute drivel for the Minister to suggest that the problems of hill farming are related purely to the beef ban? Does he not know or even care that the prices of fat cattle, store cattle and lambs are now much lower than they were 12 months ago, which was well after the ban was introduced? Does he not know that the prices of store
cattle and sheep are now lower than when he took responsibility for the industry? Is it not true that that is because of the Government's policy of keeping sterling so high, which is destroying our sheep exports and encouraging beef imports? What will he do now about the proposals to end the intervention for beef, which would only mean more imports into this country and even lower cattle prices for our native breeds and all others?
Mr. Rooker: The hon. Gentleman seems to be under the illusion that we are not living in a market economy.
Diet and Nutrition
7. Mr. Cousins: What assessment he has made of variations in diet and nutrition between the regions of England; and what role the Food Standards Agency will have to investigate them. [12616]
Mr. Rooker: The Department assesses regional variations in the diet of the British population using the continuous national food survey and, with the Department of Health, the national diet and nutrition survey programme.
Mr. Cousins: Does the Minister agree that the consumption of fruit, vegetables and salad is lower in the northern region of England than in other parts of England? Does he agree that that is a matter not just of individual choice but of social exclusion from good diet because people find themselves on low incomes, with no cars and facing high-cost food? Will he assure the House that the Food Standards Agency will do some proactive work and contribute to the Government's policy on social exclusion so that diet is also considered when we talk about social exclusion?
Mr. Rooker: My hon. Friend is right to say that the consumption of certain foods varies on a regional basis. More up-to-date figures will be published on 10 November in the next national food survey. A special analysis of regional data is contained in that report.
On my hon. Friend's second point, the Food Standards Agency will play a key role in advising on nutrition and diet issues, working with the Department of Health. That will be made abundantly clear in the White Paper later this month.
Mr. Paterson:
As there is a variation in the incidence of tuberculosis in badgers in the different regions of Britain, can the Minister say whether the Government have any policy on that matter? Farms have been closed--
Madam Speaker:
Order. This question does not relate to badgers; it is about nutrition in the regions.
Mr. Tredinnick:
Does the Minister accept that an important element in nutrition can be vitamin supplements? Is he aware of the dismay among many alternative and complementary medical practitioners and nutritionists about the ban on over-10 mg vitamin B6? Does he accept that, across the industry, most people believe that 100 mg is perfectly safe? Is not the advice that the hon. Gentleman has accepted fundamentally flawed, having been based on a 10-year-old survey largely
Mr. Rooker:
The hon. Gentleman raises a legitimate point, but I invite him to re-read the further information that he has received--as, indeed, has every hon. Member. The advice was not taken on the basis of one scientific paper--more than 100 have been assessed.
The point that needs to be made abundantly clear to everyone, especially those outside the House, is that in respect of dietary supplements we are acting on the basis of food law. If people want to take them on health grounds, there is health law covering that, but I am not dealing with that.
8. Mr. Hanson:
If he will make a statement on progress into investigations into the dumping of radioactive material at sea. [12617]
Mr. Rooker:
The searches to identify any unrecognised dumping of radioactive waste at sea have now been completed, apart from those at the Ministry of Defence, where they are unlikely to be completed this year, I regret. Only one further instance of such dumping has been identified in addition to those I announced in July this year. This concerns the disposal of radioactive miss-distance indicators by the Royal Air Force in the Holyhead deep in 1974.
The details of that disposal have been passed to the National Radiological Protection Board and have been included in its independent assessment of all the disposals. I expect to receive the board's report and to announce its findings very shortly.
We have throughout kept fully informed all the territorial Departments of Government, as well as the Government of the Irish Republic.
Mr. Jack:
That was a statement
Mr. Rooker:
The question asked for a statement.
Mr. Hanson:
I thank my hon. Friend both for his comments today and for his statement in July. That brought to light, for the first time, unacceptable practices undertaken under previous Governments to dump radioactive material at sea--including in Liverpool bay, off the north Wales coast, near my constituency.
Will my hon. Friend continue with open government and bring forward any relevant proposals? When the board's recommendations are made and the details are known, will he put them before the House so that we can understand what happened under previous Governments?
Mr. Rooker:
The matter will be dealt with openly, and the report published.
Mr. Alasdair Morgan:
Is the Minister aware that radioactive contamination at sea also comes from nuclear establishments? Is he further aware that, as recently as
Mr. Rooker:
I am aware of that. One reason why that contamination was discovered was the constant surveillance of our seashore for contaminants. It is a crucial and continuing process. Action will be taken when contaminants are found.
9. Mr. Pickthall:
If he will make a statement about the level of confidence of the British public in British beef. [12618]
10. Mr. O'Hara:
What steps he is taking to improve confidence in British beef. [12619]
13. Mr. Beith:
If he will make a statement about the current state of the beef sector. [12622]
Dr. John Cunningham:
Numerous Government initiatives have helped to secure significant improvements in the beef consumption level, indicating a return of consumer confidence. However, the European beef sector remains in long-term structural surplus. The Government are pressing for fundamental reform of the EU beef regime through negotiations on the Commission's agenda 2000 proposals.
Mr. Pickthall:
I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. Will he go on to tell us whether he detects greater confidence in British beef among our European partners, and how that confidence might be manifested in policy or regulation changes?
Dr. Cunningham:
We have been working hard to re-establish confidence not only in British beef but in the British Government's contribution to open and constructive dialogue in the affairs of the European Union, the Commission, the Council of Ministers and the Parliament. Two of our proposals are now under consideration in Brussels to lift partially the ban on British beef. The first is the certified herd scheme, and the second is the date-based scheme. It will be for the various committees of the Brussels Commission to make decisions on those schemes. I keep urging them to press ahead, without further delay.
Mr. O'Hara:
The over-30-months scheme is one of the measures that has contributed greatly to raising confidence in British beef, but it has many faults. Will the Minister conduct an investigation into the scheme's workings, with particular reference to geographical distribution of abattoirs in the scheme? Apart from the commercial implications of uneven and inequitable distribution of abattoirs, there is an animal welfare consideration. Cattle--particularly casualty cattle--are having to travel unnecessarily long distances to slaughter.
Dr. Cunningham:
Administration of the scheme is dealt with by the Intervention Board executive agency. However, abattoirs have been chosen on the basis of competitive tender, hygiene performance and geographical location. I realise that the over-30-months
Mr. Beith:
Does the Minister realise that beef farmers in Northumberland have had animals transported from Northumberland to Cornwall for slaughter under the scheme and also face those transport costs? Does he realise that those beef farmers are also facing continued competition from imported beef, which still does not have to meet the standards that we set for our own beef product? Today, he has already admitted that hill beef farmers are facing particular difficulties. Does he realise that those difficulties are relevant to his decisions about hill livestock compensatory allowances?
Dr. Cunningham:
Yes, I recognise the first problem mentioned by the right hon. Gentleman, because he wrote to me about it. I said that I thought that that type of situation was clearly unsatisfactory, and that it should also be unnecessary.
As for beef imports, the House will recall that I made it clear both in the Chamber and in Brussels that, if the European Union Council of Ministers did not act to apply a uniform policy on removal of specified risk materials in beef across the entire European Union, I would act unilaterally to prevent imports from the European Union that had not been so treated into the United Kingdom. We were successful in winning on that issue in the negotiation by a single vote.
In July, however, I made it clear that it would be necessary for me to make a concession to win that vote. The concession was that implementation would take effect not on 1 October 1997--as it would have done had I acted unilaterally--but from 1 January 1998. That concession was necessary to win the argument in the Council by eight votes to seven.
I know that, for a very long time, the right hon. Member for Berwick-upon-Tweed (Mr. Beith) has represented hundreds, if not thousands, of hill beef farmers. I have represented many such farmers, although for a slightly longer time. We both know the problems very well. I say again that, this year, there will be £450 million-worth of direct support for farmers in the beef sector, and that we are spending colossal sums in trying to resolve the problems that they face, particularly from BSE. The solution to the problem is not more subsidy, as Conservative Members seem to think, but to solve the problems that are of their creation--first, BSE--and of over-capacity in Europe's beef sector.
Mrs. Spelman:
Given that red meat consumption has fallen by 25 per cent. in the past 20 years and yet, in the same period, the incidence of colon cancer has increased by 20 per cent., will the Minister explain why he has given his full support to the Committee on Medical Aspects of Food Policy report which recommends a further reduction in red meat consumption? Is not that one more nail in the coffin of the United Kingdom's red meat industry, which is already in crisis?
Dr. Cunningham:
The COMA report has not been published in full, so I advise the hon. Lady to wait and
Mr. Nicholls:
It is not going to be possible to restore confidence in British beef if there are no British beef producers left. Does the right hon. Gentleman not realise that his failure to match the previous Government's commitment to make a payment of £60 million--indeed, he intends to reduce it--has caused real fear and terror among hill farmers? Does he not understand that to sneer that hill farmers are one of the less efficient sectors of the British industry, as he did earlier in these exchanges, means that he is devastating a vital part of our agricultural community and, at the same time, making it abundantly clear that he has no idea of the role that hill farmers play, not only in British beef production as a whole but environmentally? Is it not about time that the right hon. Gentleman's deeds matched his rhetoric?
Dr. Cunningham:
One abiding reason that the House can rarely, if ever, take the hon. Gentleman seriously is that he has only one mode, and that is always over the top. Given the location of his constituency and mine, I suspect that I have far more regular contact, and on a much wider basis, with hill farmers than he ever does. He asked why I have not matched in the coming year the previous Government's commitment to support for HLCAs--the answer is that I have. We are working on the same proposals as the previous Government.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |