§ Lords amendment: No. 13 in, page 27, line 29, leave out from beginning to "the" in line 32.
§ Mr. Buchanan-SmithI beg to move, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said amendment.
§ Mr. Deputy SpeakerWith this amendment we are also to take Lords amendments Nos. 14 and 15. I call attention to the fact that privilege is involved in these amendments.
§ Mr. Buchanan-SmithThe amendment made in the House of Lords is a substantive amendment. It is a proposal that we discussed at considerable length in Committee. I pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Bute and North Ayrshire (Mr. Come) who took a special interest in this subject in Committee and pressed on the Government the desirability of making more money available for the fish farming industry. I have no doubt that he will welcome the amendment made in another place and the fact that the Government have decided to accept it.
My noble Friend made it clear in another place that we are ready to accept that the clause should give general enabling powers for the provision of grant aid to fish farmers. We took careful note not only of what was said in Committee but the points made in the other place by Lord Cledwyn, who moved the amendment, and to whom I pay tribute for the moderate and constructive way in which he put it.
Lord Cledwyn made it clear that enabling powers were being sought and not a commitment to use the full range of the powers. I emphasise that, because, although I am prepared to accept the enabling power, by doing so I do not want to encourage the view that in the short term the Government would seize the opportunity to use the powers.
I am afraid that the financial circumstances are the same as I explained in the earlier stages of the Bill. There is no provision in the existing public expenditure programme for such a scheme. In present economic circumstances I could not make a commitment to introduce such a scheme. In the light of the strength of the arguments made by my hon. Friend the Member for Bute and North Ayrshire and in another place, I am prepared to see enabling powers in the Bill. At the appropriate stage, when financial circumstances permit, we shall have the power on the statute book and it can be used by the Government or a future Government.
As I said earlier, the fish farming industry is important to this country. It is a young growth industry which in some areas can provide much stimulus to employment and to economic activity. I cannot see us using the enabling power in the near future but that does not detract from the role that the industry has to play—which, as in so many other ways in the Bill, we are seeking to help.
I do not think that what I have said is unexpected. I should like to give a happier answer, that we would use. the enabling power in the near future, but it is only fair to the House to spell out the precise financial position.
§ Mr. Roy Mason (Barnsley)I congratulate the right hon. Gentleman on two counts: first on receiving his Privy Councillorship, as I am sure the House and those interested in agriculture and fisheries will know that in the past two years he has earned it. Secondly, I congratulate him on accepting the Lords amendments. Although he resisted that move in Committee, he has had the grace to accept defeat from the other place. But I do not want him to repeat the dampener that he has put on accepting the amendments.
The fish farming industry must be encouraged. The clutch of amendments to clause 31 is designed to encourage the growth of what the Minister calls a young industry. I have been following the subject with great interest. The industry has so much to offer. First, it is a developing source of high protein food and, interestingly, so many species can be fanned, all of which will be in great demand in markets, supermarkets, hotels and, even, exports.
In recent times more trout is going into the home than ever before. It is not just hotel or restaurant fare. With expansion in the fish farming industry, oysters, prawns turbot, sole and many other table species could be farmed and would be readily available at manageable prices for working class families who would not have to confine their main fish dish to North Sea cod—good though it is. Fish farming producing a variety of white table fish could be an attractive proposition.
Secondly, the Minister briefly mentioned that it would provide an expansion of jobs in rural areas, such as jobs in fish production, transport, the service industries; all helping to stop the drift from the countryside.
Thirdly, there is a possibility of a growing export industry. We have allowed some Continental countries to move ahead of us. For example, the demand for oysters and prawns in the hotel trade and clubland is considerable. Already, even from Northern Ireland, the production of the Pacific oyster—an oyster being farmed there which can be eaten all the year round—is an export winner and selling well on the Continent. In my days there I gave it all the encouragement I could.
Apart from that selective form of export, there is still much to be done in the mass production of some species of fish for some impoverished countries where fish is not so easily available. Much lies ahead for this small industry which, if it is given the right financial encouragement by the Government and the EEC, could do so much for employment in many of our rural areas. It could satisfy a growing desire for more types of species of table fish and encourage the export trade.
Another new use of fish farming could be to produce grass carp. That is a species of carp that could be introduced into many lakes and coarse fishing ponds to devour much of the weed that is choking many good sporting fish waters.
The Ministry of Agriculture has had the imported grass carp under surveillance and test for some time. It is now satisfied that it has not imported any alien diseases and it is being released under control to selected breeders and bailiffs. That could prove to be a boon to many water bailiffs and water authorities to help clear their waters and, especially, to coarse fishing, the most thriving sport in the country.
408 The amended clause 31 will be designed to encourage all those developments. It arms the Government and the Ministry of Agriculture with enabling powers to act with financial assistance as soon as the Bill is enacted and the review document is published. We want to be assured that the Ministry has sufficient powers to act swiftly.
We hope that the review which has been promised—in Committee it was promised in the spring and the right hon. Gentleman told the Committee that he had the draft in his hands on 19 February—will chart a course for the industrial expansion of fish farming. We hope that it will point the way to a national grants scheme for fish farming instead of the small and inadequate power and finance that is now available from sources which give a picture of inconsistent treatment in the United Kingdom as a whole.
No doubt Government guidance will be given in the review about species that can be farmed, control of licences, planning advice, disease control and so on, to ensure the expansion of a properly controlled and regulated industry. Perhaps we could be told which bodies are financing fish farming, their total annual grants and the regions of the United Kingdom that benefit.
The industry is still in its birth throes. How big is it? How many fish farms are there in this country and what is their total output? If Government and Common Market grants are to be more readily available after the passing of the Bill, what will be the starting point? How big is the industry?
I have perused all the papers that we received in Committee and reports of the passage of the Bill through another place. Little information has been provided during the Bill's progress through Parliament. The Minister of State said in Committee that, in addition to the imminent release of the review of fish farming, another review is underway on inland fisheries—lakes, ponds and fishing rivers. What does the right hon. Gentleman have in mind? What will the review cover?
Many anglers and their associations will be taking a keen interest in that review. Angling is the biggest participant sport in the United Kingdom. In the coarse fishing season, allied with deep sea fishing, 3 million people go fishing every weekend. I am one of them and I participate in deep sea, fly and coarse fishing, so I am particularly interested in the review.
This is an appropriate time for the Minister to unveil what he and the Ministry have in mind for anglers and the future of their sport. It is very important, because it affects millions of anglers and the vast organisation of industries and firms that support them. Some information about the review would be helpful.
§ Mr. John Corrie (Bute and North Ayrshire)I thank my right hon. Friend the Minister of State for his kind references to me. I should point out that in Committee the Opposition also pressed hard on this matter. I thank my right hon. Friend even more for accepting the amendments. There will be an enormous welcome for the Government's decision from the fish farming industry, coupled with an understanding of the fact that, because of the economic situation, the powers are only enabling.
As the right hon. Member for Barnsley (Mr. Mason) said, the Government's decision will be an enormous boost to a relatively young industry which has enormous potential, particularly in rural areas. It is just what is needed to encourage development in the industry.
409 Fish farming is not in competition with sea farming, but complementary to it. It is easy for large industrial groups to find the capital required to set up in fish farming, but it is difficult for small farmers and crofters to find the necessary capital. Eventually, it will be possible for those who have access to the grants and subsidies, when we can pay them, and access to water to benefit.
Fish farmers tend to be not ex-fishermen but the sons of fishermen or stockmen who have been farmers. Fish farming requires a high degree of stockmanship. I look forward to the day when there are many small units in our rural marine areas, where farmers can act as partners to big organisations and can take in young fish, rear them and sell them back matured to those organisations. In that way we could get quality control as well as market control.
I am sure that my right hon. Friend the Minister of State would be the first to agree that small farmers in rural areas are just the people who need and deserve most help. They tend to live in remote areas and often have only small incomes and cannot afford the necessary capital to set up in business. The Government are taking a major step in helping the industry, which has already been helped through rate relief.
There is still much to be done. I hope that the Government will bring in further legislation, particularly on the control and eradication of diseases, import controls on live fish and so on, to protect our industry from the ravages of disease. I hope that my right hon. Friend can give us some idea when such legislation might be introduced.
§ Mr. Robert Maclennan (Caithness and Sutherland)I join the other speakers in the debate in welcoming the Government's decision to accept the amendments, which will allow the promotion of schemes to assist fish farming. I am less enthusiastic about the Minister of State's suggestion that he does not expect that money will be forthcoming from the Government.
Could the scheme be used in connection with money made available by the Highlands and Islands Development Board? Would it be necessary for the HIDB to use the enabling powers if it wished to promote a fish farming scheme in which those involved wanted to avail themselves of assistance from the EEC?
I understand that the HIDB finances a number of important fish farming ventures in the Highlands and Islands. There are several in my constituency, including an important one at Scourie, where salmon are being successfully farmed in an area where employment is difficult to find. That highlights the importance of fish farming in providing employment in remoter rural areas.
The right hon. Member for Barnsley (Mr. Mason) referred to oysters from Northern Ireland. I am not sure whether the clause relates to Northern Ireland. The scheme may extend to the whole of Great Britain, which does not include Northern Ireland. If the Province is excluded, perhaps the Minister of State will explain why.
I understand the general tightness of finance, but the fishing industry is under considerable pressure and it would be reasonable for the Government to look to fish farming as an area where there could be useful expenditure to make good some of the losses of stocks that are resulting from the contraction of the industry.
I hope that the Minister of State will come back to the House soon to take the Government beyond a mere commitment in principle to using new resources to enable 410 the development of species currently regarded as luxuries, such as turbot, sole and some shellfish, for the benefit of our consumers as well as the producers.
§ Mr. Buchanan-SmithI thank the right hon. Member for Barnsley (Mr. Mason) for the kind words at the beginning of his speech and I thank other hon. Members for welcoming the amendments.
I particularly return the thanks of the right hon. Member for Barnsley, because I visited a number of fishing ports in Northern Ireland earlier this week and I was entertained to lunch by some of the fishing interests. At the lunch I was given the opportunity to taste the very oysters of which the right hon. Gentleman spoke. If, during his period as Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, he had some responsibility for assisting in that development, all I can say is that it was a very worthwhile development that I have subsequently been able to enjoy.
5.30 pm
More seriously, the right hon. Gentleman is correct in saying that the development of special fisheries such as oysters and the help given in different areas has not only benefited those operating the farms but has also helped to develop the potential for exports.
The right hon. Gentleman asked a number of questions about fish farming generally. A considerable number of bodies can give and have given grants for fish farming. It is possible for my Department, for the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries in Scotland and for the Welsh Office to give grants under the Agriculture and Horticultural Development Scheme and under the Agricultural and Horticultural Co-operation Scheme:. Grants can also be made by the Department of Industry, the Council for Small Industries in Rural Areas, the Scottish Development Agency, the Welsh Development Agency and the Development Board for Rural Wales.
The Highlands and Islands Development Board also has powers. I am not aware of any problems within. the Highlands and Islands Development Board relating to EEC: finance. So far as I know, the board has the necessary enabling powers and can take advantage of funds available from Europe. If, however, the hon. Member for Caithness and Sutherland (Mr. Maclennan) has any problems in mind, I should be grateful if he will inform me about them. I shall pass them to my noble Friend who deals with these matters within the Scottish Office.
I should like to pay a tribute to the Highlands and Islands Development Board for the financial help given to fish farming and the initiative taken in research programmes and activities to encourage fish farming in an area that has natural advantages through the availability of water and so on.
Grants are also available in Northern Ireland. In answer to the hon. Member for Caithness and Sutherland, I can say that Northern Ireland is excluded from the Bill because: powers already exist there. Northern Ireland blazed a trail for the House with the Assistance to Fish Farming Scheme (NI) 1973. Another source of grants is the European Community. The Bill assists those in this country who wish to take up European grants.
I was asked to identify the regions that benefit from grants. It is fair to say that Scotland has benefited more than any other region. The bulk of the grants has gone to Scotland. This is explained to some extent by the fact that Scotland has been a particularly suitable area for this type 411 of development. The total of grants paid in 1980–81, so far as I have been able to ascertain, was about £1 million. There are about 400 fish farms.
There has been reference to the review that the Government are carrying out. The right hon. Member for Barnsley is right in recalling that I had hoped that we should be able to issue the consultative document this spring. Those who have suffered the vagaries of the British weather, as I am sure the right hon. Gentleman has suffered them on his fishing expeditions at weekends, will know that spring is a little late this year. I am sorry that we have not yet issued the document. I hope to be able to issue it shortly because I should like consultations to begin as soon as possible.
The document will cover a wide number of issues. It is not for me to anticipate the result of consultations. The document will cover broadly the issues of local fisheries administration, salmon, fish farming and fish diseases. Many of the issues are related. On a number of issues, interests will conflict. There will be legitimate commercial interests on the one hand and equally legitimate sporting and angling interests on the other.
I shall seek to set out the different arguments as fairly as possible. I hope that all the interests concerned—sporting, industrial and administrative—will submit their views. I shall, of course, try in some areas to give guidance relating to the lines on which discussion should proceed. I am not, however, prejudging any issue. I shall await the replies before coming to any decision.
My hon. Friend the Member for Bute and North Ayrshire (Mr. Corrie) asked about the possibility of legislation following the consultative document. The Bill deals with a number of matters that the Government have identified as urgent and requiring action. Equally, when my hon. Friend sees the consultative document, I think he will appreciate that it refers to some matters on which action could be taken administratively if the decision is that action is needed. Legislation would not necessarily be required. Some items, of course, may require legislation. I cannot say what items might emerge. If that were known, there would be no purpose in issuing the consultative document.
There will be limitations on the opportunities for legislation in the next parliamentary Session. I cannot give an undertaking at this stage that, even if matters are identified that require legislation, the Government will necessarily be able to legislate in the 1981–82 Session. The matter has to be examined in the light of the consultations.
I should have liked to be able to say that extra finance will be available to fish farming in the coming months. I have faith in the future of the industry but I have given reasons why I cannot make any statement relating to finance now. I am sure that the right hon. Gentleman was not trying to gloss over the fact that the Government have already made a considerable contribution to fish farming.
I have listed the bodies that give grants for the development of fish farming. I have mentioned that £1 million was given last year. We have taken legislative measures to remove some of the restrictions from which fish farming has suffered in recent years. This is welcomed very much by the fish farming industry.
I know that the fish farming industry has also welcomed the decision that the Government took last autumn that fish farms would not be subject to rating. That is probably one 412 of the biggest single financial advantages given to fish farming. It was an advantage that the Government were glad to be able to give. I am pleased that we have this enabling power. I hope that when financial circumstances permit we shall be able to extend greater encouragement to the fish farming industry.
§ Mr. MasonThe first draft of the review document has been in the Minister's hands since 19 February. The contents are obviously known. The right hon. Gentleman will know how controversial those contents will prove. Will he therefore lay down a time scale for consultation? Secondly, what will be the breadth of the inland fisheries review?
§ Mr. Buchanan-SmithI cannot recall immediately the exact context of my remarks in February. I think that I was probably referring to one specific part of the review. The House will appreciate that the review is in four parts. The last part has been in my hands for only a few weeks. The other parts of the review, including the one on fish farming, were in my hands earlier. We have waited to put together the entire review. Some of the officials in my Department have been involved in all the different parts of the review. It was not possible to take them all forward at exactly the same stage.
There will be a time scale for the consultations. The consultative document will specify the date on which we hope to receive the results of the consultation. Much will depend on the precise date on which the document is issued. I hope that the consultations will be completed by the autumn. Ministers will then be in a position to consider the representations that have been made.
The right hon. Gentleman asked about the scope of the review of inland fisheries. All matters relating to fish farming and fish diseases will come within inland fisheries. Salmon will also be included in that part of the review. We shall be covering both the roles of the regional water authorities and the future role of the sea fisheries committees. There is an overlapping of responsibilities, especially in estuaries.
I am concerned to ensure that our administration of fisheries, especially when there is overlapping, is effective. No decisions have been taken on changes that might take place or on administrative improvements. We are issuing a proper consultative document. We shall advance certain ideas and we shall state the problems. We shall then look forward to receiving representations from all those with interests before we reach decisions.
§ Question put and agreed to. [Special Entry.]
§ Lords amendment Nos. 14 and 15 agreed to, both with Special Entry.