---

Animal Slaughtering

8. Mr. Graham Allen (Nottingham, North) (Lab): How many animals were slaughtered in the UK to provide food in the last year for which figures are available; and if she will make a statement. [180211]

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mr. Ben Bradshaw): Mr. Speaker, 27 million cattle, sheep and pigs, and 877 million poultry were slaughtered in 2003.

Mr. Allen: I thank the Minister for that reply. Wearing his environment hat rather than his agriculture hat, he will know that it takes 10 tonnes of corn to make 1 tonne of beef. Does my hon. Friend feel that the level of meat eating—in this country and, indeed, globally—is sustainable in the long term? What research is his Department undertaking to ensure that we sustain our environment both nationally and globally?

Mr. Bradshaw: I think that my hon. Friend is right to say that it is possible to feed more people on grain than it is on meat, but I would point out that the biggest increase in meat consumption has been taking place in the developing world, particularly in those countries that enjoy the highest economic growth in south-east
 
24 Jun 2004 : Column 1446
 
Asia. The evidence from European meat consumption, which is pretty stable, suggests that it gets to a level at which it does not increase any more, while at the same time productivity increases at a faster rate. I am not quite sure that my hon. Friend's argument completely holds water.

Mr. Edward Garnier (Harborough) (Con): The Minister will know that my Harborough constituency is a beef-producing constituency that is dependent, agriculturally, on that sector of the industry. Will he let me know when the Government will ensure that the over-30 month scheme is removed so that we can develop the sector better and export meat to the developing countries that the Minister mentioned?

Mr. Bradshaw: We are as keen as the hon. Gentleman to get the OTMS system lifted and our beef exports resumed. I am sure that he will welcome the fact that the beef sector has recovered since foot and mouth, and that beef prices are now increasing quite usefully. We are working hard in discussions with the Food Standards Agency and our colleagues in the Department of Health to make progress on both OTMS and the export scheme.

Alistair Burt (North-East Bedfordshire) (Con): At the East of England show last week, I was repeatedly asked by farmers and consumers alike why our food labelling still fails to distinguish adequately between meat produced from animals grown, raised and slaughtered in this country and that from elsewhere. Is the Minister satisfied that nothing further can be done with food labelling?

Mr. Bradshaw: As the hon. Gentleman will be aware, food labelling is now a matter for the Food Standards Agency. We are as keen as he is on having accurate consumer advice when it comes to labelling and country sourcing. Most of the meat that he would buy in supermarkets or from his local butcher would be labelled if it were produced in this country. We want to improve that, but it is a matter for the Food Standards Agency.

Fisheries

9. Mr. Austin Mitchell (Great Grimsby) (Lab): If she will provide financial help for the Grimsby and east coast fishing fleet over the next two years. [180212]

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mr. Ben Bradshaw): Fishing communities are already benefiting from various grants, which will continue, but we do not consider it a sensible use of public funds to maintain over-capacity in the fleet.

Mr. Mitchell: I thank my hon. Friend for that answer, but I hope that he will not enter into any premature no saying, without first studying the report by Andrew Palfreyman, commissioned by Yorkshire Forward, on how to arrest the decline in the catching side in Yorkshire and Humberside. It shows that we have already declined disproportionately—more heavily than in any other part of the country—and that unless
 
24 Jun 2004 : Column 1447
 
support is provided, that disproportionate decline will continue. Owners will sell their track records to others who are receiving Government support—a code name for Scotland. That will lead to the industry falling below the critical mass necessary to support the jobs and facilities onshore. The report also says that it might lead to the closure of one or more white fish catching ports on the Yorkshire east coast. I hope that my hon. Friend will study the report closely—I am waving it at him as I speak—and that he will consider ways of helping the industry on the east coast of Yorkshire to ensure that it does not bear another disproportionate decline.

Mr. Bradshaw: I shall certainly study the report carefully. My hon. Friend is right to say that fishermen in his constituency have suffered disproportionately, but that is because the stocks that they have targeted—cod stocks in particular—are the ones that have become especially depleted. However, he is wrong to suggest that the Scottish industry is being treated differently this year. It is not: it has not received any of the tie-up grants, for instance, that I imagine my hon. Friend would advocate for the industry in his own area. In the end, the industry in his area wants a sustainable future, so that it can make profits. That will require recovery in the cod stocks, and that is why the measures that we have introduced are so essential.

Mr. Henry Bellingham (North-West Norfolk) (Con): Is the Minister aware of the Wash inshore shellfish fishery in my constituency? Fishermen there fish for cockles, whelks, mussels and shrimps, and they are not interested in grants from the Government so much as in having a system of environmental health testing that is fair, compared with the EU. Has the Minister had a chance to visit the Wash fishery; and, if not, will he come and meet fishermen in my constituency?

Mr. Bradshaw: I should be delighted to consider a visit to the hon. Gentleman's constituency. I am well aware of the problem that he raises. We have been in discussions with the Food Standards Agency about the methods that have been used up to now to test the waters used by our shellfish industry. I believe that the latest statements from the FSA will address the concerns that the hon. Gentleman raises.

Litter

10. Mr. Bob Blizzard (Waveney) (Lab): What steps she is taking to reduce the amount of litter dropped in public places. [180213]

The Minister for the Environment and Agri-environment (Mr. Elliot Morley): We are undertaking a number of initiatives aimed at reducing litter in public places. These include introducing a voluntary code of practice for the fast food industry, revising the code of practice on litter and refuse, issuing guidance to responsible bodies on dealing with drug-related litter, and reducing the irresponsible disposal of chewing gum. We also fund ENCAMS, the charity that runs the Keep Britain Tidy campaign, to undertake targeted public campaigns aimed at changing behaviour.

Mr. Blizzard: Does my hon. Friend agree that, as well as spending millions of pounds on cleaning up litter, we
 
24 Jun 2004 : Column 1448
 
should do much more to deal with the people who drop it? I introduced two private Members' Bills on this subject, and I was delighted that the Government introduced section 119 of the Local Government Act 2003, which gave local authorities the power to retain revenue from fixed-penalty fines to enforce the law. However, some councils do not take advantage of that power, and I am sorry to say that one such is my own Waveney district council. What can my hon. Friend do to ensure that councils do what is expected of them, and make the polluter pay?

Mr. Morley: I am very concerned to hear that my hon. Friend's local council has not taken up the power that it has been given, especially as my hon. Friend deserves much credit for changing the law to allow local authorities to keep the revenue accruing from the fines that they levy for littering. That is a very unusual facility, and it allows councils to plough back the money into tackling the important quality-of-life issue that is the litter problem. We meet the Local Government Association regularly, and I assure my hon. Friend that I shall take the matter up in those discussions.

Miss Anne McIntosh (Vale of York) (Con): It is clear that the Government's action has not worked. There has been a 12 per cent. increase in litter in the past year and—given that the Minister mentioned chewing gum—a 94 per cent. increase in chewing gum droppings. Westminster city council issued 21,000 litter fines in the past five years, whereas Bath council issued only one. When will the Minister get tough on litter and tough on the causes of litter? When will he require councils to levy fines in a uniform manner?

Mr. Morley: The hon. Lady will know that the Government's relationship with local government means that local councils have a great deal of autonomy about their choices and responsibilities. I am very glad that some local authorities take the litter problem seriously, and we are backing that up with our talks with the industry about matters such as the serious problem posed by chewing gum. Also, ENCAMS provides funding for awareness campaigns that are aimed specifically at young people—although I am sorry to say that the problem of littering is not confined to them. We want all local authorities to meet the standards of the best, which is why we have the local government quality programme. As I told my hon. Friend the Member for Waveney (Mr. Blizzard), we talk to the LGA regularly about this matter. That organisation would be concerned if local authorities, having been given as much autonomy as is possible, were not using it effectively in the interests of the people whom they are elected to serve.

---