Marginal Land Farms

HC Deb 17 July 1989 vol 157 cc9-10

7. Mr. Livsey

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales why certain marginal land farms in Wales have been excluded from the latest less-favoured area status review.

Mr. Peter Walker

All those farms whose owners or occupiers put forward representations or appeals against exclusion from the LFA, after the 1984 extension, had their cases fully considered during the recent review. Some 974 farms satisfied the initial land quality tests and, of these, 500 satisfied the strict economic and demographic criteria laid down by the EC. A case to include those 500 farms in the LFA has been submitted to Brussels.

Mr. Livsey

Does the Secretary of State agree that it is extremely unfair that only half of the farms that were originally passed are now included—500 of them, in Dyfed, Clwyd, Gwynedd and Gwent—and that none of the 139 farms submitted for Powys is included at all? Does he agree that that is a disgraceful situation which he and his Department should investigate immediately and put right?

Mr. Walker

No, Sir. The Commission's proposals were that the basis of stocking rates should be one livestock unit per hectare. I decided to put forward proposals which go for a higher stocking rate than that as I believe that there was an argument for so doing. We have put forward all those cases which submitted not just one, but 1.2 livestock units per hectare. I am afraid that no application in Powys had a stocking rate of less than 1.57 livestock units per hectare. There is no way of negotiating that with the Commission under the present proposals. To do so would damage my negotiating position, which is to seek an extension of what the Commission proposed.

Mr. Flynn

Is the Secretary of State not concerned that these marginal lands and other lands in Wales may have been treated with the fungicides identified by the United States as causing an additional 100,000 cancer deaths? Is he aware that those fungicides will not be tested or examined in the Harpenden, Hertfordshire laboratory in Britain possibly for 10 years, because staffing there is 25 per cent. below strength? How much longer must we go on eating food treated with chemicals that have not been properly tested and which present a threat to our lives?

Mr. Walker

I hope that before this matter is properly examined the hon. Gentleman will not yet again create an enormous scare which may not be well founded. As his question has nothing to do with this application to the European Commission, I shall reply to him separately.