HC Deb 14 December 1961 vol 651 cc620-1
23. Mr. Bence

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what was the total cost of farm buildings attracting grants or subsidies for the year 1959–60; what were the total grants and subsidies paid; and what steps are being taken to ensure that grants or subsidies are paid only to those whose income is inadequate to meet the present cost of building.

Mr. Soames

In the year ended 31st March, 1960, work on farm buildings costing £17.2 million was assisted under the Farm Improvement Scheme or the Hill Farming and Livestock Rearing Acts in the United Kingdom. Payments of grant totalled £5.9 million. These grants are designed to promote efficiency and no distinction is drawn in regard to the income of the applicant.

Mr. Bence

Is that not a really shocking answer—35 per cent. subsidy to farmers? Has the right hon. Gentleman consulted his right hon. Friends to see if it is possible to adopt a system of grants and subsidies based upon the income of the people getting the subsidies such as his hon. Friends want applied to other members of the community who are getting subsidies?

Mr. Soames

This grant is for the land owner and not for the land occupier. It is designed to increase the productivity and efficiency of farming. More than any single Act that has been passed through this House in recent years the Farm Improvement Scheme has done more than anything else to bring about the fact that, although costs have gone up in the last six years to the tune of about £162 million, the value of grants has increased only by about £56 million, which means that agriculture, by improved efficiency, has itself been able to take up £100 million.

Mr. Peart

How can the Minister argue that the Farm Improvement Scheme has improved farm conditions when incomes of small farmers have decreased over the last five years?

Mr. Soames

This is across the whole board and throughout the whole country. I was referring to 1955–61. Certainly, the situation vis-à-vis farmers' incomes would not be nearly as good today had it not been for the Farm Improvement Scheme.