| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Lord McIntosh of Haringey: My Lords, the Treasury is not only well aware that British industry is preparing for the fact that the euro exists, but since 1997 has consistently encouraged that. We have published a series of national changeover plans to reflect the fact that it is, as the noble Lord, Lord Taverne, rightly said, in this country's interest to be fully prepared for the euro and to be prepared for it whether or not we are ourselves within EMU. That has been a consistent part of government policy from the outset.
Lord Saatchi: My Lords, the EU says that we shall have to rejoin the ERM before joining the euro. The
Government say that we shall not. Will the Minister give an undertaking today that after a "yes" vote in a referendum we shall not join the ERM before joining the euro?
Lord McIntosh of Haringey: My Lords, the Government have no intention of joining the exchange rate mechanism. Having said that, I think that the noble Lord is a little out of date. No doubt he quoted what an unnamed Commission official said yesterday about British membership of the exchange rate mechanism. However, I do not think that he has read today's Financial Times which points out that Commissioner Soldes has said that there is a margin for manoeuvre.
Lord Harrison: My Lords, will the Government's "speak your weight" machine say how long we have to wait before we can speak up in favour of the euro? Does my noble friend agree that political confidence in any economic project is a sine qua non of its success?
Lord McIntosh of Haringey: My Lords, I have no intention of seeking to censor what the noble Lord, Lord Harrison, says. His comments constitute a valuable contribution to the debate. They always have been and, no doubt, will continue to be so.
Lord Higgins: My Lords, with regard to the so-called convergence test, will the Government take into account in particular the experience of the United States and Canada? For many years those economies might have been thought to be convergent and at one stage the Canadian dollar was worth more than the US dollar. However, had the Canadian Government agreed to go into a single currency at that point, the subsequent effect on the Canadian economy would have been utterly disastrous.
Lord McIntosh of Haringey: My Lords, I am sure that that is one of the considerations that will be taken into account. I notice that contributions from the Opposition Benches always avoid actually taking a position on whether the Opposition are in favour of going into the euro. They have valuable points to make but they are peripheral.
Lord Pearson of Rannoch: My Lords, why do the Government continue to deceive the British people by pretending that the euro involves an economic project? The Commission and everyone else in Europe are quite open about the fact that it is a constitutional initiative, which is designed to cement together the emerging EU mega-state. What is the point of economic tests for a constitutional project?
Lord McIntosh of Haringey: My Lords, the noble Lord says that the Government are continuing to deceive the British people. If I were to respond to that, it would be like responding to the question "Have you stopped beating your wife?", which my wife would not allow me to do. As to whether there are other
considerations, we have always said that there are other considerations but that they can be applied only once the economic tests have been satisfied.
Lord Peston: My Lords, is my noble friend aware that economics is a universal science and that there is therefore no concept that could be meaningfully put forward about a decision that was not economic in nature? Those who suggest that the matter is all political are simply talking rubbish. This is an economic decision problem because all problems are economic decision problems.
Lord McIntosh of Haringey: My Lords, I am not really one for academic discipline—I was a university fellow in economics but flunked out of that position when I discovered that I did not understand anything about it. However, my noble friend's response to the point made by the noble Lord, Lord Pearson, is very worth while.
UK Beef Exports: French Ban
2.52 p.m.
Earl Peel asked Her Majesty's Government:
- What practical steps they are taking to re-establish the market for British beef in France following the recent judgment of the European Court of Justice.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Lord Whitty): My Lords, the Government have made it clear that they expect France to lift its ban as soon as possible and the Commission to take further proceedings in the European Court of Justice if France does not do so within a reasonable period. We have also written to the Commission seeking a relaxation of the conditions of the date-based export scheme. Officials met the industry yesterday to discuss the way forward.
Earl Peel: My Lords, I am grateful to the Minister for that robust Answer. In reality, are we not witnessing yet another case of a senior—indeed, a founder member—of the European Union flouting the rules in order to try to get advantages for its own producers? That makes a mockery of the whole concept of a "common" market. More importantly, will the Minister assure the House that he intends to make certain that the Commissioner imposes maximum sanctions on the French Government if they persist in refusing to take British beef—a market which represented about 46 per cent of our pre-1996 worldwide beef exports?
Lord Whitty: My Lords, the export market to France before BSE was certainly very important for this country's livestock industry. By observing the new standards we could begin to restore that market once France has withdrawn its ban, as it is bound to do in view of the Court judgment. My right honourable
friend the Secretary of State made it clear at the Agricultural Council just before Christmas that we expect the Commission to take action and that, within a reasonable timescale, we will press it to do so. I hope that the French comply. If they do not, I hope that the Commission will take the strongest possible steps, as the noble Earl suggested.
Lord Hooson: My Lords, what do the Government regard as a reasonable period in this context?
Lord Whitty: My Lords, the next action rests with the Commission rather than the Government. As with similar cases, there is no set timescale but, as with cases in which a government have not complied with a judgment of the Court of Justice, the Commission has tended to take up the matter within two or three months.
Lord Brittan of Spennithorne: My Lords, does the Minister agree that it is not just farmers who think that the Government should be much more vociferous in protesting against a flagrant breach of European law and that they should do so publicly and privately using every possible occasion and every possible EU forum? Does he further accept that those of us who are most strongly in favour of the EU also feel most strongly that it is completely unacceptable for a country that regards itself as an advocate of further European integration to go flagrantly against the integration that is currently supposed to exist and to defy the rule of law, which is the foundation upon which the whole of the EU edifice has been built?
Lord Whitty: My Lords, I and, I think, the whole House endorse that position. We have made our position clear both publicly and privately, directly and indirectly. We expect France to comply.
The Countess of Mar: My Lords—
Baroness Gibson of Market Rasen: My Lords—
The Lord Privy Seal (Lord Williams of Mostyn): My Lords, shall we hear from the Cross Benches?
The Countess of Mar: My Lords, I declare an interest as chairman of Honest Foods. The Minister may be interested to know that we are trying to organise a visit of 12 producers of British food to the game fair at Chambourg on 21st and 22nd June. What is the position of the several beef producers who have shown an interest? Will they be banned by the French? If so, what representations will the Minister make to ensure that appropriate demonstrations are made of British beef and that it is sold to the French?
Lord Whitty: My Lords, British beef producers, like other food producers, have every right to try to sell their wares in France. The British Government support them in doing so. I would hope that the French will have complied by June, although one has
to bear in mind that there are certain domestic complications of an electoral variety in France at the moment, which may make that more difficult. I also believe that there are many people and companies within France who would welcome the restoration of British beef exports.
Baroness Gibson of Market Rasen: My Lords, what is the current position on BSE in this country and is there any BSE in the herds in France?
Lord Whitty: My Lords, the number of cases of BSE in Britain is coming down very rapidly, whereas the number in France is increasing. There are more than 250 cases in France. In absolute numbers the incidence in Britain is still significantly higher than in France. Historically, we have had a huge number of cases—178,000—whereas France has had only a few hundred. The issue needs to be put in perspective. Nevertheless, our figures are going down and those for France are going up.
Next Section
Back to Table of Contents
Lords Hansard Home Page