Examination of Witness (Questions 160-169)
MR JOHN
DYSON
27 OCTOBER 2008
Q160 David Taylor: I just wondered
if you had any idea what that cost might be.
Mr Dyson: No, not at this stage.
It will depend on what the structure of the industry is going
to look like in five years.
Q161 David Taylor: How well do you
think the British taxpayer would take it if more money was being
passed on to pig farmers?
Mr Dyson: We are in a situation
where, if we are going to support our industries and people are
interested in pig farming and buying British pork and they see
this as a way forward, then I am sure it can be explained.
Q162 David Taylor: The best way of
supporting industry should be a relatively low cost one of the
British Hospitality Association, the British Retail Consortium
and others not conspiring in the misleading labelling of pork
products that we see on a grand scale. I am not suggesting you
are responsible for it but are you fighting against it vigorously
enough? That would be the best way of helping the British pig
meat industry, would it not?
Mr Dyson: There is no conspiracy
in the British Hospitality Association with respect to labelling.
That is not happening. The industry is not conspiring against
the consumer in any way.
David Taylor: I do not think I have ever
seen a restaurant that has made a big issue of the provenance
of the pig and it being British.
Q163 Mr Gray: I am a bit puzzled
by this. Your job as the British Hospitality Association is to
provide first class hospitality and therefore if you can buy anything—in
this case it is pig meat—for 40% cheaper from overseas than
you can from here, and if the consumer is perfectly happy to eat
that bacon from Denmark rather than bacon from Wiltshire, why
on earth do you think the taxpayer, especially at a time like
this, should stump up large sums of money to subsidise an industry
which is unable to produce goods at a competitive price? Surely
you can tell people, "This is great. Cheap stuff is coming
in from Denmark and frankly I do not care whether British farmers
cannot compete. What is the problem with that?" Why do you
as the BHA have a strong view on this?
Mr Dyson: The countryside is an
important part of tourism. If we do not have farms, we do not
have animals. We do not have tourism. It is not going to help.
You only have to look at the damage that was done by the foot
and mouth outbreak. We have had damage done to the pig industry
by a foot and mouth outbreak in recent times. The reality of life
is we believe that we should support the farming industry full
stop. We should have a countryside that is worth people going
to see and tourism is an important part of the economy of this
country. Therefore, there is a good reason for supporting the
UK.
Q164 Mr Gray: Surely the whole point
about the CAP reforms is moving away from subsidies in particular
parts of farming. Beef, dairy and vegetables and everything else
are now competitive and making money. What you are saying is you
would like the government to subsidise one particular small part
of the industry, the pig industry only, and fork out large sums
of money to keep the pig industry going despite the fact that
it is completely uncompetitive with the rest of Europe. I do not
follow that. The argument about the countryside is one thing but
what you do not want to see in the countryside is free range pigs.
They make one hell of a mess. I would much rather see cows and
sheep.
Mr Dyson: If the industry had
had a level playing field to play off to begin with and they had
not been landed with the costs of the welfare regulations, then
life would probably have been a lot simpler than it is now.
Q165 Dan Rogerson: You believe this
collaborative work on developing just what it is the consumer
wants to see could increase the confidence of the industry to
do more about reporting that back so that people will see it as
a positive? The work that McDonalds does about saying where things
come from a bit more may be slightly less on this and means that
everybody will be able to move forward together. That will hopefully
put the local industry on a far more secure footing.
Mr Dyson: Yes.
Q166 Chairman: You touched very briefly
on the Scottish Sector Task Force of which you are part. Do you
think that its aims and objectives are sensible and practical?
Do you think we ought to have one in England?
Mr Dyson: I did not say we were
part of the Scottish Pig Sector Task Force. I went up there for
a meeting with various parts of the Scottish pig industry and
they talked about producing the Scottish working party, but they
did not invite us to join the working party. We found that a bit
strange but we did say that we would be part of a working group
that looks at provenance labelling. That is what we are doing.
Q167 Chairman: You are an adjunct
to it?
Mr Dyson: Absolutely.
Q168 Chairman: Given that you took
an interest in it, I am not quite clear what it is supposed to
be doing. What is it supposed to be doing?
Mr Dyson: I am not 100% certain
what the Scottish Working Party on Pigs is doing. I think it is
there to help to try to promote Scottish pigs and the Scottish
pig industry one way or the other.
Q169 Chairman: We ought to address
our questions to them and say, "What are you doing?"
It would perhaps be unfair for you then to nail your colours to
the mast as to whether we should have one in England or not.
Mr Dyson: I think you should ask
them the question.
Chairman: Thank you very much indeed.
You have given us a clear insight into how the hospitality industry
sees this problem both in your oral evidence and in your written
evidence and for both we are most grateful. Thank you very much.
| 
