§ 4. Mr. Dykesasked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when he next expects to have an official meeting with his counterparts in the other EEC member States.
§ 12. Mr. Gwilym Robertsasked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he plans to meet the EEC Commissioner for Agriculture.
§ Mr. John SilkinI shall attend a meeting of the Council of Agriculture Ministers next week and I expect that Commissioner Gundelach will also be present.
§ Mr. DykesI thank the right hon. Gentleman for his reply. Can he make any comment on the Commission's latest sheepmeat proposals, with particular reference to New Zealand?
§ Mr. SilkinI do not think that the sheepmeat question will be coming up during the discussion of the prices package. I do not think that it possibly can. Therefore, there will be plenty of time to consider it before the proposals are discussed by the Council.
On a number of occasions, I have made the three points that are essential and that must govern our attitude to regulations, or lack of them. First, there must be a fair deal for the consumer—there must not be excessive price rises. Secondly, there must be a fair deal for the producer. Thirdly, there must be a total safeguard for New Zealand.
§ Mr. RobertsWill my right hon. Friend make clear to the Commissioner that the Government expect not only a modification of, but fundamental changes in, the common agricultural policy and that they will not rest until they achieve these changes?
§ Mr. SilkinI had a feeling that we were already starting those changes and that, to some extent, the atmosphere was beginning to change inside the Commission and the Council chamber, to the extent that they were moving much more towards the position that we have advocated many times in the House. How- 648 ever, I agree that the process is only at the beginning and that it has a long way to go.
§ Mr. Raphael TuckWhen my right hon. Friend meets his counterparts, will he draw their attention to the fact that the Australian Prime Minister, who was originally a supporter of the EEC, has now called it a narrow, self-interested trading group, seeking to make the rest of the world dance to its tune, and has pointed out that Australian exports of food to the EEC in the last four years have declined by 80 per cent.? Does my right hon. Friend not think that something should be done for Australia, which, like New Zealand, fought for us in two world wars?
§ Mr. SilkinI have never had the slightest doubt that there is as much of an obligation to Australia as to any other of our Commonwealth countries and, because of that, it has always seemed to me that we must consider carefully the Australian complaint that at the time of our entry to the EEC they were told that this would merely mean that they would have to diversify their market, that perhaps that might not be a bad thing and that it would be easy, though they would no longer have the United Kingdom market that they had once had. In fact, their exports went down from 46 per cent. to 6 per cent.
The trouble is that, having sought out other markets, the Australians have found EEC exports there, accompanied by restitutions on a basis that, in the old days, we might have called dumping.
§ Mr. PowellWhen the Minister next meets his counterparts to coninue discussion of a common fisheries policy, will he bear in mind the importance of this House having the opportunity to know and, if necessary, to debate in advance the many detailed proposals that are being put into a package on the common fisheries policy, which does not consist exclusively of the question of fishing limits?
§ Mr. SilkinThere is a great deal in what the right hon. Gentleman said. As one approaches this problem, one sees how important the details are and how near they come to questions of principle. I shall certainly consider what the right hon. Gentleman said.
§ Mrs. Winifred EwingWill the Minister give the House an assurance that at the forthcoming meeting he will hold firmly to his stand on the 50-mile limit? What success, if any, does he forecast will be achieved at the meeting?
§ Mr. SilkinI doubt that at this meeting there will be anything more than a series of bilateral discussions, as there were at the last Fisheries Council. I do not think that there has yet been a sufficient meeting of minds to enable one to define a common fisheries policy—at least on the basis that we would like. However, being by nature optimistic, of course I believe that we shall succeed.