9 Jun 2009 : Column 519
9 Jun 2009 : Column 519
9 Jun 2009 : Column 519
Tuesday, 9 June 2009.
2.30 pm
Prayers—read by the Lord Bishop of Liverpool.
Agriculture: Sheep
Question
2.37 pm
To ask Her Majesty’s Government why they are introducing the compulsory electronic identification of sheep by implant; and whether they have taken account of the views of the industries concerned.
Lord Vinson: My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name. In so doing, I declare an interest as a part-time farmer.
Lord Tunnicliffe: My Lords, the introduction of electronic identification is an EU obligation, which must be implemented on time to avoid national disallowance and/or infraction proceedings. We are working closely with the Commission and the UK industry to minimise the impact of these regulations. We have already secured significant beneficial changes, such as a two-year delay in implementation and the phasing in of individual recording.
Lord Vinson: My Lords, I thank the Minister for his reply and wish him well in his endeavours, but why has it taken so long for the Government to comprehend the intense hostility to this measure from those breeding and slaughtering some 10 million of our sheep from the largest flock in Europe? Would he not consider, in view of the fact that full traceability of sheep movements already exists, that this might be an excellent opportunity for the EU to demonstrate its democratic legitimacy not only by granting a temporary derogation but by abolishing this costly, impractical, unnecessary and wholly nonsensical regulation?
Lord Tunnicliffe: My Lords, it is not fair to say that it has taken the Government a long time to recognise the concerns. We have been well engaged with the industry and we work hard with it to get appropriate derogations and variations. I accept that this regulation is probably, on balance, not a good idea. It will create more costs than benefits in most of the industry. Nevertheless, those costs have been significantly reduced by our negotiations. This is part of being in the club called the European Union, of which I am proud to be a member citizen.
The Countess of Mar: My Lords, I declare an interest as a very small sheep farmer—I am not talking about my size—in that we have only six sheep at the moment, as the rest drowned a few years ago. Will the
9 Jun 2009 : Column 520
Lord Tunnicliffe: My Lords, I confirm that goats are off the hook. The modest benefits of the scheme are traceability in the event of a foot and mouth outbreak and the likelihood of reducing the cost of such an outbreak by between 3 and 13 per cent. As monitoring becomes widespread, some businesses will find benefits in better flock management and monitoring of breed performance.
Lord Burnett: My Lords, I declare an interest as an owner and landlord of agricultural land. I do not know whether the Minister is aware of this, but the average net income for a sheep farmer in the United Kingdom is about £8,000 per year. The estimated cost of one of these electronic tag readers is about £8,000. Who will pay this cost and the additional costs that will be imposed not only on farmers but on livestock markets and abattoirs? Will the Minister assure us that this regulation and a compulsory scheme will not be foisted on the United Kingdom?
Lord Tunnicliffe: My Lords, working backwards, I assure the noble Lord that a regulation will be introduced by the due date of the end of December this year. I am aware that sheep farmers have modest incomes. The cost per animal is likely to be about £1. The cost of readers is likely to be £400, not £8,000. The potential full cost is £50 million. The slaughter derogation that we already have will reduce this, if accepted by the Community, to some £20 million and, if we go to critical control point, that will reduce it to something like £12 million. So while it is an additional cost, it is modest compared with the overall size of the market, which is worth £650-plus million, perhaps approaching £800 million or £900 million in the present good years.
Lord Acton: My Lords, I was not clear from what my noble friend said—
The Minister of State, Department of Energy and Climate Change & Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Lord Hunt of Kings Heath): My Lords, why do we not hear from my noble friend and then from the noble Lord, Lord Plumb?
Lord Acton: My Lords, I was not clear from what my noble friend said who is going to pay.
Lord Tunnicliffe: My Lords, it is absolutely clear, I am afraid, that the industry and the individuals in the industry will pay.
Lord Plumb: My Lords, I declare an interest as a farmer and as president of the National Sheep Association. The Minister said that contact had been made with the industry and that many negotiations had taken place, so he will know full well the frustration, concern and anger of many sheep farmers throughout
9 Jun 2009 : Column 521
Lord Tunnicliffe: My Lords, it would be wrong of me to pretend that I had any knowledge of this subject 12 hours ago. Equally, my knowledge of getting sheep off a hill is pretty thin. However, I have gone through this with great care and I am totally convinced that it is practicable, given the derogations and variations that we have sought. The slaughter derogation, which means that stock under 12 months going directly to slaughter are derogated out of the scheme, and the critical control points system, which we are putting forward to the industry and which we hope to be able to negotiate with Europe, would move the paperwork away from the breeder to the slaughterhouses and markets. These matters are still in consultation. There is a consultation running now with our own industry, with which we will be having further discussions, but we are working very hard to make the scheme practical.
Lord Soulsby of Swaffham Prior: My Lords—
Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: My Lords, perhaps we should hear from the noble Lord, Lord Soulsby.
Lord Soulsby of Swaffham Prior: My Lords, contrary to the opinions of my noble colleagues, one effective method of identifying sheep used to be ear-notching, whereby shepherds could tell precisely where the sheep had come from and so on. Despite their objection to the scheme, it is important to know where sheep come from and to follow them for disease surveillance and disease control. Therefore, as a veterinarian concerned with the control of disease in sheep, I welcome this means of identification.
Lord Tunnicliffe: My Lords, I recognise the noble Lord’s great knowledge in this area and the great contribution that he has made, and I entirely agree with the points that he makes.
Prisons
Question
2.46 pm
Asked By The Lord Bishop of Liverpool
To ask Her Majesty’s Government who is responsible for monitoring the enforcement of Prison Service orders.
9 Jun 2009 : Column 522
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Justice (Lord Bach): My Lords, Prison Service orders contain both mandatory actions and guidance. Compliance with the mandatory requirements is included in the establishments’ service level agreements, or contracts in the case of contracted prisons, and is monitored by directors of offender management, who are accountable to the chief operating officer.
The Lord Bishop of Liverpool: My Lords, I thank the Minister for his Answer. As I understand it, Prison Service orders carry responsibility for the management and governance of prisons. What is their legal status and do they require ministerial clearance before they are issued?
Lord Bach: My Lords, like Prison Service instructions, Prison Service orders are not in themselves legally binding, though of course some of them are mandatory instructions and have to comply with prison rules and other legislation. Prison rules are legally binding; they are made up of statutory instruments. Prison Service orders are not themselves legally binding, just as any organisation’s internal instructions are not legally binding, although I believe that Prison Service orders go through Ministers.
Baroness Linklater of Butterstone: My Lords, can the Minister clarify whether PSOs cover secure training centres, which come under the Prison Service and take children as young as 12? Several reports have shown an inordinate and unacceptable amount of restraint being used in those centres. There is a Prison Service order, PSO 4950, which covers juveniles, but I am not aware of one covering secure training centres.
Lord Bach: My Lords, nor am I, I am afraid, but I shall try to find out whether one does. If it does, I shall of course write to the noble Baroness at once.
Baroness Seccombe: My Lords, which official body writes and implements these Prison Service orders and how often are they reviewed? I have in mind the order concerning prisoners with disabilities, which on one occasion, following the unannounced visit by Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons, revealed that some disabled prisoners were unable to shower, one for more than a year.
Lord Bach: My Lords, in answer to the noble Baroness’s first question, PSOs are written by a range of policy leads in the headquarters of the National Offender Management Service and are issued on the authority of that service’s agency management board. So far as concerns the reports of the treatment of prisoners with disabilities—I think that she is referring to Parkhurst—that particular PSO is currently under review as part of the work following the publication of the NOMS single equality scheme. The review of the PSO predates the publication of the report on Parkhurst by Her Majesty’s inspector but is ongoing so that the issues raised by the inspector’s report can be taken into account during the review process.
Baroness Stern: My Lords, does the Minister agree that giving prisoners one hour a day in the open air is a fairly uncontroversial basic entitlement? If he were imprisoned, which is quite unimaginable, would he
9 Jun 2009 : Column 523
Lord Bach: My Lords, it is a statutory requirement that prisoners have time in the open air every day subject to weather and, of course, the need to maintain order and discipline. No amount of time is specified. The core day, as the noble Baroness knows, was introduced in June 2008 and is intended to provide greater consistency in access to activities by ensuring that adequate staff are available at the times when activities are scheduled. The figures for 2008-09 show an increase of 2 per cent in physical education over the previous year. PSO 4275 is, as I understand it, an ordinary PSO, and if it is breached, the prison governor is accountable.
Lord Elton: My Lords, do the PSOs distinguish between the private sector and government-run establishments, and are they enforced in the same way?
Lord Bach: As I understand it, my Lords, the answer is yes. They are enforced in the same way in both instances and the prison governor is the first person held responsible if they have not been enforced properly.
Lord Low of Dalston: My Lords, will the Minister tell the House whether PSO 1900, on certified prisoner accommodation, is constantly reviewed in the light of the problem of overcrowding of prisons?
Lord Bach: My Lords, I am sure that it is, because it is a very important issue.
Lord Ramsbotham: My Lords, I know that this refers to a Prison Service instruction but the Minister has referred to instructions as well as orders. Can he tell us how governors are practically measuring and recording the reviews of what are described as “responsible members of the public” in relation to the programmes they are required to introduce for the rehabilitation of offenders?
Lord Bach: My Lords, I cannot give the noble Lord the detail that I think his question requires. Perhaps I may take it back and write to him.
Women: UN Special Rapporteur
Question
2.53 pm
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they will support the establishment of a post of United Nations special rapporteur for women.
9 Jun 2009 : Column 524
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, we want the United Nations to be the most effective instrument it can be in improving the lives of women across the globe. We think that the best way to do this is to support the United Nations in its discussions on reform of the UN gender architecture. We will consider any idea that promotes gender equality. However, we must be convinced that it adds value to existing UN organisations that are designed to promote gender equality.
Baroness Afshar: My Lords, I thank the noble Lord for that very helpful Answer. Would the Government consider appointing a rapporteur and follow the example of Ireland, where they have appointed a rapporteur for UN Security Council resolution 1325? Given that women are still considered to be the booty of war and that they are attacked, raped and violated in situations of conflict, someone needs to be there immediately to deal with it on behalf of the international community.
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, I do not want anything that I say now to detract from the importance we attach to the United Nations contribution on this very important topic. However, rather than adding a rapporteur to the existing responsibilities in the field of eliminating violence against women and all forms of discrimination, we believe that the establishment of the United Nations agency that is being proposed, with the officer possibly at Under-Secretary-General level, is the right way to tackle this. There are already two people, in the committee and a person, in those roles. What we need is an overarching committee, which is suitably staffed at a high level. We are therefore not persuaded that an additional rapporteur is the answer to the UN’s position.
Baroness Trumpington: My Lords, am I right in thinking that the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women, on which I represented this country, followed by my noble friend Lady Gardner, acts as a representative body of women on the United Nations, or has it packed up?
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, we are discussing the question of executive action and how the United Nations can act effectively in this area. It will not surprise the House to learn that the rapporteur is a proposal from the French, from President Sarkozy. It has not won a great deal of support at the United Nations, because the United Nations has been concerned in recent months to create a fresh structure that will give real executive authority at a high level to the necessary actions to promote the equality of women.
Baroness Northover: My Lords, following on from the answers that the Minister has just given, a week ago the noble Lord, Lord Malloch-Brown, said that he spent a large portion of his last period at the UN working on just the structure that the Minister is talking about: trying to set up a strong and effective organisation for women to promote the rights of women within the UN. What is the nature of the backing from the UK Government for that proposal?
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |