HL Deb 07 June 1985 vol 464 cc954-8

12.2 p.m.

Lord Gallacher

My Lords, I beg to move that this Bill he now read a second time.

This Bill seeks to extend the remit of the Agricultural Training Board, to enable it to provide certain of the services to the agricultural industries overseas which it currently provides only within Great Britain. I am sure that those noble Lords who are familiar with the agricultural industry will be aware of the standing and esteem in which the Agricultural Training Board is held within the farming community in Great Britain. Established in 1966 to provide training for the commercial agriculture and horticulture industries in Great Britain, the board has considerable expertise in its area, and particularly in the provision of short craft skills courses organised through groups of farmers brought together by the board and run by trained instructors from within the industry. Such courses are available to all workers and farmers, to widen their range of skills or bring them up to date with new methods.

The board's maintenance of high standards of training has justifiably earned it a reputation which extends beyond the confines of Great Britain, and sales of training aids and instructional material overseas, and visits to the board's training centre at Stoneleigh by agricultural delegations from overseas, have kindled a great deal of interest from those other countries. The board is, however, under its current legislation—the Agricultural Training Board Act 1982—only permitted to train people working in overseas agriculture if they are temporarily resident in Great Britain. In consequence, the board has, in the past, been forced to decline involvement in many overseas projects. Requests have also been made to the board to provide training packages to complement major export contracts to third world countries: for example, for irrigation works, or in the provision of agricultural plant or machinery. I am told that our failure to provide a quality training package in support of some of these projected contracts has made a material difference to our competitive position. Also, the long-term success or failure of a large agricultural project overseas will often depend on the way in which knowledge and skills can be imparted to local workers.

In this context, the training methods promoted by the board, of trained experienced workers using systematic training techniques within a group structure, encourages a rapport between trainers and trainees and has a ready place in ensuring that the necessary skills become established.

Looking at the Bill in detail, Clause 1(1) amends Section 5 of the Agricultural Training Board Act 1982, removing the constraint contained in the Act which permits the training of overseas persons only while they are temporarily in Great Britain. It is intended that the board should be free to undertake functions detailed at Section 4(1) of the 1982 Act to provide courses, assistance in finding training facilities, and research and advice in connection with training for employment in agriculture overseas. Subsection (2) imposes on the board the requirement to act commercially in the exercise of its overseas functions so that at an early date it can show that expenditure on overseas work can be met from revenues raised. This is an important provision which seeks to avoid any diversion of funds from home training to subsidise the training of others, however well-deserved, outside the United Kingdom.

Subsection (3) obliges the board to maintain separate accounts and records and to prepare a separate annual statement of account in respect of its overseas functions. Again, this is to safeguard United Kingdom interests and to assure the farming community in the United Kingdom that money is not being diverted from its training needs into those of industries overseas.

Clause 2 formalises the obligation on the board as a public body to provide a right of access to its books and records. There has been for many years an agreement that such access would be given, but it has not hitherto been written into legislation and it would be prudent to include such a provision, to bring the board formally into line with current guidelines for non-departmental public bodies.

Clause 3 is a technical clause, to enable money to be made available by Parliament to the board so that it may initiate overseas training activities. It is however intended that this Bill will not give rise to any ultimate charge on public funds, as the extended functions provided by the Bill will be conducted on a self-financing and, hopefully, profit-making basis.

Clause 4 is largely a procedural clause, giving the Short Title, the commencement date and the important exclusion that this Bill does not extend to Northern Ireland. Although the Agricultural Training Board operates in England, Scotland and Wales, other arrangements are made in Northern Ireland. I commend this Bill to your Lordships.

Moved, That the Bill be now read a second time.—(Lord Gallacher.)

Lord John-Mackie

My Lords, we are all grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Gallacher, for putting this Bill before us, and congratulate him on the various points he has made, which are very relevant to the situation. Like the noble Lord, Lord Bruce of Donington, I want to take this opportunity to make a point I have always wanted to make about agricultural training.

We all know of the necessity for agricultural training, but it has sometimes been said that agricultural workers of the old school did not have any skills and that such training was necessary to provide them with skills. Nothing is further from the truth. When I started farming back in the mid-1920s, the agricultural workers then had skills comparable to those of today's workers, and even more so. In those days, the work was all done by hand or by horse. One thinks of the skills of horsemanship, ploughing, harvesting, stacking, and even of sowing by hand. It was a tremendous skill to spread seed by hand evenly over a ploughed field. Ridging, and more especially the splitting of ridges, is another great skill. I could go on to give more examples of old skills which agricultural workers used to have. I should hate to think that anyone imagines that the training board was brought into being in order to teach agricultural workers skills they already had. Today, all those old skills have gone, and we certainly need them.

Forgetting about those skills for a moment, perhaps I may tell a story about my youngest son. We were making hay, and the hay-turner broke down. Not altogether jokingly, I said "We had better get out the forks." He and the other man just looked at me in amazement as if they had never known that hay was turned with forks by hand—and not all that long ago. I can assure your Lordships that it is a very skilled job.

All these new techniques have been brought in lately almost as if there had been an industrial revolution in the past 20 or 30 years and the two decades since about the middle of the war. The necessity for training has become paramount because these changes have come about so quickly. I am glad that I was in the ministry in 1966, when the Agricultural Training Board was established, and can take some credit. Terrible mistakes and accidents were of course happening with the new machinery that was coming in so quickly. It is not going to stop, as new methods are appearing almost every day, and training must therefore go on.

To come to the Bill, it is more than necessary, as I think I can illustrate, that it should extend overseas. This is long overdue. I give your Lordships two instances of over 20 years ago when I was in Africa. I went to Basutoland—now Lesotho—with a party which I believe included the noble Lord, Lord Somers, who is not here today. I had a certain reputation for a knowledge of agricultural engineering and was asked to break away from the party to look at some difficulties they were having with harvesting in the south of the country. I was horrified to see a new Massey-Harris combine harvester, which was about eight or ten feet wide, that a co-operative had purchased. The co-operative had no idea of how to work it. Most of the fields were not much bigger than this Chamber. It had not been maintained at all. The rod that drove the blade was broken. When I examined the machine it was apparent that it had not seen grease for goodness knows how long. It was most pathetic that the machine was taken there, but the people had received no training whatever.

The other example was when at the same time I went to Botswana at the other side of the Kalahari Desert. We landed on an airstrip and on the way out I tripped over something entirely covered by grass. It turned out to be a set of irrigation pipes. Later I was taken to see the agriculture, which was in a very dry area, although there was quite a big river not far away. They were trying to establish lucerne, which is a deep rooting plant once it is established. However, it had repeatedly failed due to the drought. I told them that there was an irrigation plant lying on the airfield and the reply I received was that nobody knew how to work it. It was most extraordinary. The equipment had been brought out, presumably to irrigate the airfield which did not need irrigating, and there it was. I give those two instances to show how necessary it was then, and still is, to have some form of training. As the noble Lord, Lord Gallacher, pointed out, it would be of assistance to our suppliers if good training is given with the sale of equipment. That is a very real point and the Bill will do that.

There is only one point I want to make on the Bill itself. I refer to the commercial aspect that has been emphasised; that it must pay. It must be difficult at times to evaluate how much a commercial company should pay if training gives it trade. That point will need to be looked at so that if a profit is to be made we get something from commercial firms if they benefit. With those few remarks, we give this Bill our very sincere blessing.

Lord Sainsbury

My Lords, my name is not down to speak, but all I want to say is that we on these Benches support the Bill and approve of its contents.

12.15 p.m.

The Minister of State, Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Lord Belstead)

My Lords, I join with the noble Lord, Lord Sainsbury, and the noble Lord, Lord John-Mackie, in expressing my gratitude to the noble Lord, Lord Gallacher, for introducing this Bill. I am particularly pleased that the noble Lord spoke in such enthusiastic terms of the work of the Agricultural Training Board. I agree very much with the remarks of the noble Lord, Lord John-Mackie, about the agricultural skills of former times. However, as the noble Lord very fairly added, today's agriculture and horticulture demands a high degree of technical skill and it is a fact that the chairman, board members, and staff of the Agricultural Training Board are today playing a major role in developing skills to meet that need.

The Agricultural Training Board was established in 1966 under the Industrial Training Act 1964, together with other specialist training boards in other industries, and was initially the responsibility of the Department of Employment. Logic, however, prevailed in 1975. I am not sure whether that was the time when the noble Lord, Lord John-Mackie, was exercising his influence on the Ministry of Agriculture, but the board was transferred to the responsibility of the Ministry of Agriculture and its powers have since then been consolidated in the Agricultural Training Board Act 1982.

As the noble Lord, Lord Gallacher, said, the board provides a vital training role for the commercial agriculture and horticulture industries in Great Britain. It has achieved this in the main through the development of a network of more than 600 farmers' training groups. These groups identify training needs and organise short courses to meet skill shortages. It is an excellent example of self-help within the horticultural and agricultural industries. The strength of this group activity and the board's expertise in organising the groups is of particular interest to developing overseas countries. That is where the importance of this Bill comes in.

As the noble Lord, Lord Gallacher, explained, the 1982 Act does not enable the hoard to engage fully in overseas activities. The Bill will remove the restraint on providing training for employment overseas and permit the board to provide training courses, teaching and advisory posts, as well as advice, and to charge for these services. I think that the experiences overseas of the noble Lord, Lord John-Mackie, pros e how important it is that this short Bill is being brought in by the noble Lord, Lord Gallacher.

I have just two other points. I was pleased, if I may say so, that the opportunity is being taken in the Bill to incorporate a further amendment to the Agricultural Training Board Act 1982 for the purpose of giving the Government a formal right of access to the board's books and records. Previously the subject of an informal annual agreement between Ministers and the board, this amendment simply formalises the arrangements in line with current guidelines for public bodies.

The other point is that the hoard continues to provide a high degree of service to its customers in the United Kingdom, but the Bill will now make it possible for the board to extend its activities to many areas of the world which could benefit greatly from our expertise. I believe that it is most important that the public and private sectors collaborate positively to promote the interests of our horticultural and agricultural industries abroad. It will be for the benefit of both the United Kingdom and many countries overseas which I believe will be pleased by the provisions of this Bill which will enable the board to operate overseas in a way which it is clear all noble Lords who have spoken on the Bill are welcoming.

12.19 p.m.

Lord Gallacher

My Lords, I thank all noble Lords who have spoken in this debate. I am grateful to my noble friend Lord John-Mackie for his reminder that modern skills have their counterpart in former skills. Indeed, as I listened to him, and in particular his reference to journeys overseas, I was reminded of the turn-round of the famous Churchillian phrase: "Give us the job and we will finish the tools."

On the commercial aspect, I think that as a fellow Scot my noble friend will agree that a modest beginning in this direction is probably wise, and it is for this reason rather than any attempt to restrict the ultimate expansion of the experiment that the figure of 10,000 has been put in the Bill at this stage.

We are grateful to the noble Lord for further explanation of the work of the board and in particular for his plea that that gives an opportunity for cooperation as between the public and private sectors in taking advantage of the undoubted resources and skills of the board and in particular in promoting agricultural exports of machinery and plant overseas, given the fact that training may be possible as part and parcel of such a package.

I shall not detain the House further on this. I am assuming that as there is all-party support there is reasonable prospect that the Bill will be given a Second Reading. If that is so, it will justify the fact that for my part I got leave of absence from domestic chores in order to be here today to move it.

On Question, Bill read a second time, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House.