House of Commons
Thursday 17 December 1998
The House met at half-past Two o'clock
PRAYERS
[Madam Speaker in the Chair]
Oral Answers to Questions
AGRICULTURE, FISHERIES AND FOOD
The Minister was asked--
Farm-fresh Turkeys
1. Judy Mallaber (Amber Valley): If he will make a statement on the marketing of farm-fresh turkeys. [62985]
The Minister of State, Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Mr. Jeff Rooker): The number of traditional outlets available to the trade has declined over the years but the traditional farm-fresh turkey sector does have a loyal base of customers who continue to look for high-quality fresh birds. Farm-fresh turkeys give consumers a choice and the Government would like to see that traditional production continue.
Early this morning, I visited a traditional farm-fresh turkey farm to see the production methods at first hand. To avoid any doubt, I can tell the House that the writers of recent press stories in The Times, the Daily Mail and the Evening Standard were all guilty of telling porkies about turkeys. Farm-fresh turkeys are not under threat and their production and marketing have our full support.
Judy Mallaber:
I thank my hon. Friend for that answer. I am very much looking forward to eating traditional Welsh turkey on Christmas day. Will my hon. Friend explain exactly how those press reports arose and why there was confusion about whether European Union regulations would mean that farm-fresh turkeys would not be allowed? Will he confirm absolutely that the traditional British turkey is safe?
Mr. Rooker:
Farm-fresh turkeys, marketed correctly in the traditional way, are a very small share of the turkey market, but customers can be assured that traditional farm-fresh turkeys are all British; they are never frozen; there are no added chemicals; they are dry plucked with no water drenching and, furthermore, they are not found on sale in supermarkets--customers go to a proper, traditional butcher to buy them.
Mr. Bernard Jenkin (North Essex):
Will the Minister tell the House what representations he has received from the turkey industry about the poultrymeat hygiene regulations and his efforts to gold-plate them? Will he tell
Mr. Rooker:
The hon. Gentleman has it completely wrong.
Mr. Rooker:
No, the hon. Gentleman is completely wrong. Unlicensed farm-fresh turkeys, under the limit of 10,000 slaughtered a year, are not affected by EU regulations. They are not affected, we have no proposal to bring them under EU regulations--indeed, we have no proposal to introduce further regulations for small producers on farms.
We are holding consultations about an issue that was left unchecked by the previous Government: the small, unlicensed slaughterhouses, mainly in urban areas, of which there are only about three dozen. Those slaughterhouses are not covered by the regulations, although they should be. The Conservative Government neglected to deal with that matter and that is why we are holding consultations. The traditional farm-fresh turkeys that are the subject of the question are not affected in any way by any change in the regulations.
2. Mr. Gareth R. Thomas (Harrow, West):
What safeguards his Department has introduced to ensure that consumers have adequate information on genetically modified foods. [62986]
14. Mr. Tony McNulty (Harrow, East):
What steps the Government are taking to ensure the clear labelling of genetically modified foods. [62998]
The Minister of State, Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Mr. Jeff Rooker):
The Government are committed to providing clear information to enable consumers to make informed choices about genetically modified foods, including the labelling of all foods containing genetically modified material.
Mr. Thomas:
I am grateful to my hon. Friend. Will he assure me that all genetically modified food products are clearly labelled so that consumers can make the informed choices that they want about the food that they eat? In the light of public concern, will he reassure the House that he will keep the quality of such labelling under review?
Mr. Rooker:
Yes, most certainly. There are only four genetically modified products on sale in this country at present: maize, soya, tomato paste and vegetarian cheese. They all have to be labelled if the ingredients are genetically modified. We hope to co-operate with our European partners in getting additives covered over the next 12 months, but that will require EU regulation.
Mr. McNulty:
May I assure my hon. Friend that Harrow is not the centre of genetically modified food in this country? It is a pure coincidence that my hon. Friend the Member for Harrow, West (Mr. Thomas) and I have tabled questions on that subject today.
Given the conflicting scientific advice, will my hon. Friend assure the House that he will stick firmly to the precautionary principle and ensure that, in terms of both debate and advice, the public are informed as much as possible, and will he resist those who scaremonger irresponsibly on the issue?
Mr. Rooker:
I agree entirely with my hon. Friend. We have opened up the meetings of the advisory committees that advise the Government on the issue and their minutes are now published. The Advisory Committee on Novel Foods and Processes held its second open meeting a few days ago to discuss how we can take forward long-term monitoring of genetically modified foods once they are more widely available on the market. On 21 October, a new Cabinet Committee on Biotechnology and Genetic Modification was announced and that Committee has now met. This morning, my right hon. Friend the Minister for the Cabinet Office announced a Government review of the framework of all the advisory committees on biotechnology so that we ensure that we have the right pattern of advice to the Government.
Mr. John Bercow (Buckingham):
Will the hon. Gentleman accept that, although it is desirable to provide information, labelling and, if necessary, a monitoring system, it is important to retain a sense of balance? Will the Minister, who, by the standards of Labour Ministers, has always struck me as a relatively normal individual--[Laughter.] I realise that I have probably already inflicted grave damage on the hon. Gentleman's reputation with that observation. Will he confirm that, while he is a Minister and responsible for these matters, the cause of information will not be overtaken by politically correct fetishists with a hostility to the British food industry?
Mr. Rooker:
I note that the hon. Gentleman speaks under the protection of parliamentary privilege in respect of his first comment. I understand the tone of his question and, by and large, the answer is yes. We will conduct this policy on the basis of the best science available. We will not shut out from our deliberations any scientists who are not in the loop and who have other views about this issue. We will listen to them. We will operate the precautionary principle and ensure, for example, that, as the crops begin to grow, they will be introduced in a managed way. It will not be uncontrolled. To that extent, we will work using the best science and be as open and transparent as possible.
Mr. Tim Yeo (South Suffolk):
Does the Minister agree that the fact that one in five of the official Government sites for genetically modified crops is breaking the regulation governing the trials is undermining public confidence in a potentially valuable method of food production and fuelling suspicions that the advocates of the rapid expansion of genetic modification are motivated by commercial pressures and ready to ride roughshod over legitimate public fears?
Mr. Rooker:
The short answer is that we are taking the regulation of those crops so seriously that the Health and Safety Executive is prosecuting two agricultural companies, Monsanto and Perry Field Holdings, following a routine inspection of a trial site at Rothwell on 5 June this year. The case will be heard on 17 February next year. The regulation of the science and the industry is taken very seriously.
3. Mr. Dale Campbell-Savours (Workington):
If he will make a statement on the promotion of meat hygiene in abattoirs. [62987]
10. Mr. Peter L. Pike (Burnley):
If he will make a statement on the promotion of meat hygiene in abattoirs. [62994]
Mr. Rooker:
The safety of food and consumer protection remain among the Government's highest priorities. We have therefore put in train a series of measures designed to raise hygiene standards in abattoirs and have instructed the Meat Hygiene Service to take rigorous enforcement action to ensure compliance with legislative requirements.
Mr. Campbell-Savours:
Are those in abattoirs who breach the regulations being prosecuted?
Mr. Rooker:
The short answer is yes. If prosecution is required, it will take place--in fact, there have been 19 prosecutions since the middle of 1996. Each prosecution is known and open and they are all reported in the Meat Hygiene Service enforcement bulletin, a copy of which is placed in the Library every month. If hon. Members wish to be on the mailing list--as the hon. Member for Daventry (Mr. Boswell) is--they have only to write to my Department and they will be added to it.
Mr. Pike:
Will my hon. Friend confirm that his Department is at present consulting with regard to the enforcement powers of meat hygiene inspectors? Will he confirm also that any intimidation of those inspectors is not acceptable and will not be tolerated?
Mr. Rooker:
There are two issues involved in this matter. We do not need to consult about the powers of hygiene inspectors regarding the intimidation of public staff. The Meat Hygiene Service has been told--and the advice has been clarified--that, if there is verbal or physical intimidation of staff, it has the power to remove inspectors from the part of the plant concerned. That would effectively close the plant, so the service has that power. There have been two successful prosecutions this year regarding the abuse of meat hygiene staff. Those cases have been highlighted and one was the subject of an early-day motion in the House.
As regards inspectors' other powers, we are about to consult to give them greater control, particularly over hygiene in abattoirs as opposed to meat hygiene. That would allow quicker action to be taken regarding cleaning in abattoirs, abattoir walls and other structural issues. We could then take quicker action in the case of an unsatisfactory performance.
Mr. Robert Key (Salisbury):
Does the Minister agree that most members of the public regard abattoirs as a taboo subject? That makes it even more important for Members of Parliament to see at first hand how they
Mr. Rooker:
I have visited three cattle abattoirs and a sheep abattoir. Last Friday, I visited the pig abattoir that is the family business of the hon. Member for Ludlow (Mr. Gill), who is my Pair in the House.
Mr. Lembit Öpik (Montgomeryshire):
Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food visited Welshpool market and was apprised of meat hygiene inspection issues? Is he further aware that many abattoir owners think that the cost of inspection is unnecessarily high? Will he make a commitment to re-examine those costs to find out whether savings can be made?
Mr. Rooker:
We have no intention of overburdening abattoirs, particularly small owners and operators, but there is no opportunity for derogation within the EU guidelines. There is an EU requirement that abattoirs be visited and inspected. If there are allegations that we are being too onerous, we will consider them. As I have already said, if there are allegations that the same rules do not operate in the rest of the European Union, the evidence should be given to us and we will take the matter up with the Commission, which is responsible for checking abattoirs in the rest of the EU.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |