HC Deb 17 February 1983 vol 37 cc453-4
4. Mr. Home Robertson

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will introduce a scheme to release feeding cereals from United Kingdom intervention stores to pig and poultry producers at prices that are comparable with world prices.

Mr. Buchanan-Smith

Any scheme to subsidise the price of grain to livestock producers would have to be non-discriminatory and cost-effective. I understand that the European Commission has found it difficult to devise a scheme that meets these criteria and has deferred a decision for the time being.

Mr. Home Robertson

Is the Minister aware that the pig and poultry industries are already discriminated against in that they do not benefit from the support mechanisms that are available for other parts of the livestock industry? Now that we have over 1 million tonnes of feed barley in intervention stores in Britain, which is likely to be exported to our competitors, will the Minister go back to the Commission and try to get a better deal for our pig and poultry industries and so do his bit to keep the British breakfast British?

Mr. Buchanan-Smith

I understand the problems that face the pig and poultry industries, but the hon. Gentleman is wrong to say that they do not have supportive arrangements. The European Community has introduced a private storage scheme, which is to take effect on 1 February and which the industry is already showing evidence of taking up. There will also be an increase in export refunds. I assure the hon. Gentleman that we would be happy to discuss with the Commission a nondiscriminatory and cost-effective scheme were we able to find one.

Mr. J. Enoch Powell

In considering such a scheme, will the Minister consult his colleague in Northern Ireland, where pig and poultry producers are literally being ruined in sight of the plenty that exists in storage?

Mr. Buchanan-Smith

I assure the right hon. Gentleman that we shall keep in close touch with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland. As recent studies have shown, one of Northern Ireland's problems is that the price of grain is high, if only because of transport costs. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State is aware that Northern Ireland producers have had to bear that burden.

Mr. Lyell

Is it not disappointing that no progress seems to have been made towards an effective pigmeat regime? Will my right hon. Friend comment on the stabilisation scheme that has been put forward by the NFU?

Mr. Buchanan-Smith

There is a scheme which includes sluice gate prices and helps to protect the British pig industry from imports from Third countries. We have a private storage scheme and a scheme for export refunds. Pigmeat is different from other commodities. For several years it has been 100 per cent. self-sufficient, and that must be taken into account. The NFU has submitted a stabilisation scheme, which we shall consider. However, it is significant that even the industry has some doubts about that scheme.

Mr. Geraint Howells

I am sure that the Minister is well aware that the deficiency payments scheme for cattle and sheep has worked well in Britain to the benefit of the producer and the consumer alike. Is not a deficiency payments scheme for pig producers long overdue?

Mr. Buchanan-Smith

I am sure that the hon. Gentleman, with his knowledge of agriculture, will acknowledge that the pig industry is different from others, such as the cattle and sheep industries, because the pig industry has been subject to fluctuations from time to time. In the light of our experience of other schemes, we believe that such a scheme for the pig industry would be very costly indeed.

Mr. Deakins

Surely the cost of selling feed grain from intervention stores is roughly the same whether it is sold to the British or the East German producer. Why should not this discrimination against pig and poultry producers inside the Common Market as distinct from those outside be ended?

Mr. Buchanan-Smith

The hon. Gentleman does not understand. If subsidised grain displaces unsubsidised grain used within the Community, more grain is put on to the export market. The budget then has to bear a double burden, both for feed subsidy and export refunds. For example, if there were a subsidy of £10 a tonne to users within the Community, that would raise cereal costs to the Community by about 30 per cent. I thought that the hon. Gentleman and the Labour party were in favour of keeping costs down, not increasing them.