HC Deb 12 June 1986 vol 99 cc484-6
5. Mr. Proctor

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he is satisfied with current measures to reduce European Economic Community food surpluses.

Mr. Gummer

In 1984 the Council agreed milk quotas; in 1985 important reforms of the wine regime were adopted; the price-fixing agreement this year included further steps in tackling the milk and cereals surpluses; and the Council is committeed to taking decisions on beef support later this year. We intend to keep up this steady programme of reform. There is a great deal more to be done.

Mr. Proctor

Has my right hon. Friend seen early-day motion 918 in the names of my hon. Friend the Member for Southend, East (Mr. Taylor) and other hon. Members concerning a new EEC subsidy for feeding butter to cows? What is my right hon. Friend's attitude to that? Will he confirm that £75 million a week is spent by the Community on disposing of surpluses?

Mr. Gummer

I have watched carefully the considerable efforts that my hon. Friend the Member for Southend, East (Mr. Taylor) puts into ensuring that we never miss some of the sillier things that happen in the European Community. Our purpose is to reduce the supply of goods so that they are more nearly in line with needs. We shall continue to press for that.

Mr. Deakins

As substantial price reductions are really the only effective alternative to quotas, which the Minister does not like, why are he and his Department so complacent about the impact of recent currency changes in the EEC which have meant that this year a number of farmers in countries in the Community will receive increases in their cereal prices?

Mr. Gummer

I do not think that the Department is in any way complacent. We have said that the effects of the package this time have meant a considerable cut in the price that will be received for cereals. It is not the method we would have used or for which we shall continue to press. However, we are honourable and honest enough to say that a great deal has been achieved.

Mr. Kenneth Carlisle

Does my right hon. Friend agree that any system we introduce to confront the problem of surpluses must be simple and practical, and that in order to achieve that it is best to consult those who are involved in agriculture? In that respect, will he consider producing a Green Paper on the various methods by which we could reduce surpluses?

Mr. Gummer

I am not sure that in those circumstances a Green Paper would be the right way to go about it. However, I agree with my hon. Friend that there is no way in which we can reduce the surpluses unless we do so with the support and help of the agriculture community. Sometimes I wonder whether the Oposition realise that people in the agriculture community need proper incomes as much as do those elesewhere.

Mr. Home Robertson

Will the Minister accept that his policies have caused the maximum disruption in the industry that he has just been talking about, while having the minimum effect on surpluses? As the Minister is the proud custodian of all these vast stocks of cereals, beef, dairy produce and so on, will he try, by looking after them properly, to ensure that someone gets the benefit of these stocks in due course? How about starting by ensuring that good quality cereals in intervention stores are kept separate from the uneatable stuff about which his right hon. Friend the Minister was talking?

Mr. Gummer

The answer to the hon. Gentleman's first question is no. The answer to his second question is that it is our purpose to keep the stocks in the form which makes them most saleable.

Mr. John Carlisle

Will my right hon. Friend accept that the delay and confusion over the announcement of the method of collecting the co-responsibility levy on cereals is causing great concern in agriculture? Will he also accept that the draft recommendations from Brussels are totally unworkable and very much favour the farm feed process, against the country compounder? The trade is anxious that the settlement should be made well before the harvest, so that it knows where it is.

Mr. Gummer

I am sure that my hon. Friend is right in saying that a delay in the decision is extremely difficult for the trade. As the rest of his question goes on to suggest, it is also important that we get the management arrangement correct. Our problem is that we are pushing for the most sensible and simple method which we can have in a co-responsibility levy, which is not the system we would have chosen. Therefore, I think my hon. Friend will agree that it is our job to ensure in that management committee decision that it is, ultimately, the best system for Britain.

Mr. Meadowcroft

The Minister will be aware of the concern about food contamination following the Chernobyl disaster. Can he tell us——

Mr. Speaker

Order. There is a later question on that.

Mr. Meadowcroft

I wanted to ask about the effects that Chernobyl is expected to have on EEC food surpluses.

Mr. Gummer

I think that the hon. Gentleman is getting his question in early in case we do not reach it. We are not currently in a position to assess the effect of the Chernobyl disaster on European surpluses.