HC Deb 15 March 1973 vol 852 cc1449-53
1. Mr. Hugh Jenkins

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he now intends to implement EEC Decision 73 /10 authorising the United Kingdom to subsidise sales of butter to social security beneficiaries at an initial rate of 6p per month.

2. Mr. Lipton

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he has now made a decision on EEC Decision 73/10 authorising the United Kingdom to subsidise sales of butter to social security beneficiaries at an initial rate of 6p per month.

41. Mr. Frank Allaun

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he now intends to implement EEC Decision 73/10 authorising the United Kingdom to subsidise sales of butter to recipients of social security at an initial rate of 6p per month.

The Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Mr. Joseph Godber)

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Social Services and I are considering this matter.

Mr. Jenkins

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman two questions? First, is it not the case that an authority to subsidise only those in receipt of State help is divisive, and does not this mean that if this sort of thing continues the EEC becomes a force against the social unity which has hitherto characterised this nation?

Secondly, is not the EEC recommendation proof that right hon. and hon. Members on the Government side of the House who have been saying that one cannot subsidise without rationing have been talking their usual nonsense?

Mr. Godber

No. The hon. Gentleman's first point concerns one of the issues which we shall have to consider in relation to this matter. His second point refers to a highly selective form of subsidisation, which is quite different from a general subsidisation such as he had in mind.

Mr. Body

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the last time there was a butter mountain in the Community they were feeding the butter back to the cows? It is rather difficult to find out from the French and others whether they have returned to that practice with yet another butter mountain. Does not my right hon. Friend agree that it is a silly, wasteful and stupid thing to do? Will he do his utmost to see that it is prevented?

Mr. Codber

The important thing is to try to get a proper balance between supply and demand, and this is what we have to seek to achieve in the Community as a whole.

I share my hon. Friend's concern about the wastage when there is a gross excess, and this will be a question to consider when we talk about prices in Brussels later this month.

Mr. Allaun

If we are to suffer the serious disadvantages of joining the Common Market, should not we allow a very limited number of the population to benefit from this tiny concession after the hugh increase in butter prices resulting from joining the Common Market?

Mr. Godber

We are considering this matter. We have to keep it in proportion. The benefit of this concession would be about 6p on a pound of butter, once a month only, to an individual consumer who would be qualified to receive it. That represents only about 1½p a week. One has to think of this in relation to the cost of administering a scheme such as this. This is a somewhat doubtful benefit.

Mr. Marten

Does my right hon. Friend recall that in the debate on the Opposition motion to reduce the cost of television licences the Government amendment specifically said that they were against any benefits in kind? Surely this would be a benefit in kind. Where do the Government stand in terms of consistent policy over these matters?

Mr. Godber

The Government are certainly consistent in relation to this matter. The point with which I was dealing was that this was a Community decision, and Britain has to consider whether it would be appropriate for us to apply it. We have not yet decided whether it is appropriate.

Mr. Buchan

Is not the Minister very much out of touch with the nutritional habits of our people? He has said that a pound of butter for an old-age pensioner every month is a small amount, but it is a good deal more than many old-age pensioners are able to eat at present. Does not the Minister agree that even to do this—I hope that he will—makes nonsense of all his arguments that we could not have food subsidisation in this country because it would lead to rationing? It is precisely selective rationing that we have been arguing for in relation to meat and other commodities of this kind.

Mr. Godber

The hon. Gentleman must have misunderstood what I said. I did not say that 1 lb. of butter per month was a small amount. I said that the amount of subsidisation was small. It is 6p a month, which represents 1½p a week. I did not suggest that 1 lb. of butter was looked upon as a small amount in relation to a pensioner's consumption. I am well aware of the position in regard to that.

On the hon. Gentleman's second point, I can only repeat what I said earlier, namely, that this is a very selective degree of subsidisation, which is directed at particular classes of the community which afford means of identifying clearly the people who comprise them. That is the difference between this and a general subsidisation.

14. Mr. John

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will list the subsidies on foodstuffs which will be terminated by 1st January 1974 as infringing United Kingdom obligations to the European Economic Community.

17. Mr. Orme

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he will give an assurance that he will not discontinue the present subsidies to sugar or bacon during 1973.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Mrs. Peggy Fenner)

The present subsidy on bacon will be phased out by 1st June, and the subsidy on sugar will be phased out by 1st July.

Mr. John

Does the hon. Lady concede that this will add substantially to the burdens of housewives, particularly those in low-paid families? Does she agree that this is a direct result not of world conditions but of our entry into the EEC?

Mrs. Fenner

Current world bacon prices reflect traders' responses to the market situation rather than to any EEC arrangement. As only 40 per cent. is British bacon, current imported prices have already had some effect, though this is nothing to do with the EEC.

Mr. Orme

Does the hon. Lady agree that the ending of subsidies means increases in bacon prices, and that this will be something which the Government will not be able to control? Will she give some advice on bacon? According to today's Guardian, she said that housewives will have to do something about the situation. When will she, as a Minister, do something about increased prices?

Mrs. Fenner

I am sorry, but I did not see that exact quotation in the Guardian. As I said in the House on 8th March, the first phasing out of the bacon stabiliser will add about ½p per lb to bacon prices; but, as many housewives already know, current imported prices which have been increased have been equalised over much of the bacon sold in our shops next to British bacon.

Mr. Farr

Is it a fact that the price of a number of sugar products, such as sweets, will be reduced as soon as the tax on them is abolished? Will my hon. Friend tell the Minister that we are grateful to him for having taken note of our request a month ago, and persuade the Chancellor of the Exchequer to reduce or abolish purchase tax on these important food items?

Mrs. Fenner

My hon. Friend is right. In total the food index has been lowered by 1.2 per cent. because of food items which have now been taken out of VAT, plus an estimated ¼per cent. for the removal of the second half of SET. This will show a difference of 1½ per cent. in the food index.