Previous SectionIndexHome Page


30 Jan 2003 : Column 1001—continued

Radioactive Waste

10. Dr. Stephen Ladyman (South Thanet): When she expects to make recommendations about the disposal of radioactive waste. [94167]

The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Margaret Beckett): Following consultation, we and the devolved administrations will set up a new independent body to review all long-term options for managing UK solid radioactive waste and to make recommendations to us. We shall establish it as soon as possible and we hope to receive its report and announce our decision on the UK's long-term strategy by 2006.

Dr. Ladyman : I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for that answer. She is right to want to come to the correct decision and to bring people along with her. However, it seems to me that a consensus has emerged among environmental groups and the industry that we should deposit that material underground in a way that makes it possible to recover it later if necessary, and that the only reasonable place for that is at Sellafield. As we shall reach that conclusion whether we take one year or four years to discuss the matter, should we not make the decision now and concentrate on making the process safe and determining how to compensate the local community for its involvement?

Margaret Beckett: I agree with my hon. Friend that at present there seems to be a growing number of voices making some of the points that he has just made. However, experience of the subject suggests that as soon as anybody starts to think that there is a consensus and to coalesce around it, a lot of other voices are heard saying something wholly different. Select Committees in both Houses recommended that the course of action that we are pursuing is right. As it will probably take billions of pounds and about a hundred years to deal with the issue, it is probably still worth trying to put in the investment up-front to get it right.

Mr. Eric Martlew (Carlisle): Does my right hon. Friend agree that when Nirex considered Sellafield, it found that the geology of the area was not suitable?

Margaret Beckett: Yes, I am aware of that. That is part of what I meant when I was replying to my hon. Friend the Member for South Thanet (Dr. Ladyman). He identified a number of elements and said that a lot of people think this or that and that a lot of people think that there should be retrievable underground storage. That is all true, but unfortunately as soon as one starts to get more concrete and to decide where the pattern of agreement might emerge, difficulties emerge with it. We have set in train a process to try to ensure that we build up an understanding of what really is the broad basis of acceptance and that is the right thing to do.

30 Jan 2003 : Column 1002

Sustainable Development (Mozambique)

11. Mr. Harry Barnes (North-East Derbyshire): What arrangements she has made to discuss matters of sustainable development and climate change with the Government of Mozambique. [94168]

The Minister for the Environment (Mr. Michael Meacher): We do not have any immediate plans to discuss sustainable development or climate change with the Government of Mozambique.

Mr. Barnes : Might it not be fruitful for the Government to engage in such discussions? The Government of Mozambique overcame tremendous problems caused by floods in that country about two years ago so, given our experience of flooding in this country, there might be a useful cross-fertilisation of ideas. For instance, the Speaker of the Mozambique Parliament organised a fund to assist people in Yorkshire, so we should be doing everything that we can to ensure that lessons are learned on both sides.

Mr. Meacher: Of course, I entirely agree with that. Offhand, I do not know how much aid was provided by the Department for International Development at the time of the severe flooding in Mozambique in 1999 and 2000, as a result of the extreme climatic conditions, but I have no doubt that it was considerable. I should certainly welcome further collaboration between our countries. The key point, as to whether climate change is a significant factor in the increased magnitude and frequency of flooding throughout the world, is the importance of ratification of the Kyoto protocol. I am hopeful that that will be achieved in the first half of this year. Russia is the only country that still needs to ratify for the treaty to come into operation. President Putin has already given a commitment that he wishes that to happen and we are hopeful that the formalities will be achieved by the middle of the year. If they are, it will certainly be of considerable importance to Mozambique and many other sub-Saharan African countries.

Miss Anne McIntosh (Vale of York): Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the people of Mozambique made a most generous contribution to the people of the Vale of York following the severe flooding in parts of the area in November 2000? Would it not be appropriate, therefore, for the Department to seek an early meeting with the Mozambique Government with a view to undertaking joint research into the causes of climate change, which is leading to more flooding on flood plains such as the Vale of York?

Mr. Meacher: Of course, substantial research is already being undertaken—the United Kingdom is a world leader in this—by the combined capabilities of the Hadley research centre, which is part of the Met Office, and the university of East Anglia. I am keen that there should be closer co-operation between our two countries. Mozambique made a remarkable and very welcome offer to the Vale of York and to the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for North-East Derbyshire (Mr. Barnes). I am happy to discuss

30 Jan 2003 : Column 1003

with the Department for International Development how we can deepen that co-operation to the benefit of both countries.

Mr. Tony McWalter (Hemel Hempstead): Given that my right hon. Friend's Department has a significant number of environmental and agricultural scientists, would it be appropriate for him to try to ensure that scientific expertise is made available more widely? In particular, will he channel some of that expertise through DFID to ensure that countries such as Mozambique may tap into it, as expertise is often precisely what they lack?

Mr. Meacher: I very much support that proposal. There is no doubt that the way in which we can most help the developing countries is through more quickly and effectively building up capacity there, with more technological transfer and the spreading of scientific and technical expertise. Britain has a real offer to make. We already do such work. As hon. Members have mentioned Mozambique, I will certainly speak to my colleagues in DFID to find out how much further that work can be taken.

CAP

12. Sir Archy Kirkwood (Roxburgh and Berwickshire): If she will make a statement on the latest proposals for reform of the common agricultural policy. [94169]

The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Margaret Beckett): I welcome publication of the Commission's legislative proposals for reform of the CAP, which were discussed for the first time at the Agriculture Council earlier this week. They will form a good basis for what will be hard negotiations in which we shall be both positive and proactive in pushing for an early, substantial and balanced agreement that delivers a workable and fair deal for farmers.

Sir Archy Kirkwood: While I acknowledge the need for CAP reform, does the Secretary of State share my concern about the present financial viability of cereal holdings throughout the United Kingdom? Does the right hon. Lady accept that the totality of prices available to cereal farmers plus the arable aid do not meet production costs? Later today, Scottish farm income predictions will show that the incomes of cereal producers in Scotland will suffer a further fall. Against that background, cereal producers are worried about the continuing proposals to cut intervention prices and to introduce further compulsory set-aside. Will she be careful to get enough flexibility from the review of the CAP to ensure that the viability of cereal holdings throughout the UK is guaranteed for the future?

Margaret Beckett: I can assure the hon. Gentleman that we are concerned about getting the right basic package as well as sufficient flexibility to reflect local problems. I confess that I am not immediately familiar with the sort of figures that he expects for the incomes of cereal farmers in Scotland. Certainly, there is a welcome increase in statistics on farm incomes. We expect those to be in the public domain in the near future. While I do

30 Jan 2003 : Column 1004

not suggest for a second that that will resolve the considerable problems faced by people in the farming community, it is obviously beneficial.

Paul Flynn (Newport, West): Does my right hon. Friend agree with the Consumers Association's calculation that the average family in Britain pays a £16 farm tax every week and that 80 per cent. of that money goes to the richest 20 per cent. of farmers? If the CAP is to be reformed, is not it essential that the £1 million subsidies paid to huge farming businesses are changed so that those small farmers whose future is seriously threatened get a fair deal?

Margaret Beckett: There is always argument about specific figures that come out in different studies, but I certainly accept, as most people do, that the CAP's present structure places considerable costs on consumers and taxpayers. Certainly, it must be one of the goals of reform to try to change that and produce a system that is fair, but we would like to see structures and proposals emerge from the reform package that are fair to all farmers.

Mr. Michael Jack (Fylde): Does the Secretary of State share my concern that French attitudes to CAP reform may undermine Europe's position in the context of the Doha declaration and the World Trade Organisation talks that are to come? Is she in any way building a coalition of support to counter French positions and to ensure that, under the modulation proposals, sufficient money is made available for rural redevelopment?

Margaret Beckett: It must be a prime goal of the negotiations to ensure that enough money is available on the right terms, with the right flexibility and low level of bureaucracy, for rural development. I entirely agree with that point. With regard to the right hon. Gentleman's initial remarks, I am anxious to ensure that all of us in the EU get the balance of our negotiating approach to the WTO meetings right. I am very conscious of the suggestion that, because Europe was not proactive at a sufficiently early stage in the Uruguay round, we ended up getting the sticky end of the negotiations. There is a strong area of discussion in the Council of Ministers about how we get that balance right.

John Cryer (Hornchurch): Does my right hon. Friend agree that, in years gone by, the CAP brought ruin and despair to many third-world agricultural economies because of the policy of dumping cheap food on those economies, with obvious consequences? Will she do her best to ensure that those policies are not repeated in future, so that cheap food is not dumped on the third world? Does she also agree that, despite the best efforts that were mentioned earlier, there is an increasing feeling that—perhaps partly because of the French position—the CAP is ultimately doomed, which would provide a sort of solution to the problems that many Labour Members would welcome?

Margaret Beckett: It is many years since I first came to work full time in politics, and one of the first things that I had to do was write a pamphlet explaining the CAP—I have never quite got over it. So I understand

30 Jan 2003 : Column 1005

the point that my hon. Friend makes about the difficulties that have been caused not only elsewhere in the world, but in Europe, as my hon. Friend the Member for Newport, West (Paul Flynn) highlighted a few moments ago. Ever since I wrote that pamphlet, I have believed that CAP reform was an urgent necessity.

Mr. David Lidington (Aylesbury): Will the Secretary of State say whether the Government share the Country Land and Business Association's analysis that, on the basis of the Commission's current proposals, British farmers, who receive about 13 per cent. of direct payments under the CAP, will be expected to shoulder 26 per cent. of the costs of CAP reform? Will she also say whether the Government consider that that would be a fair outcome for British agriculture and whether she will be campaigning for British farmers to bear a more proportionate share of the costs of reform?

Margaret Beckett: Without entirely endorsing the precise figures—various people come up with different studies—I can certainly say that we have some concerns about the precise impact of the legal proposals that are on the table at present, and we have concerns about whether they are entirely fair to British farmers. I have made that point already, very forcefully, to Commissioner Fischler, and I can assure the hon. Gentleman that we shall continue to make it in the negotiations.


Next Section

IndexHome Page