HC Deb 12 June 1997 vol 295 cc1279-87

3.31 Pm

Sir Teddy Taylor (Rochford and Southend, East)

(by private notice): To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will make a statement on the implications of the decision of the European Union veterinary committee to reject proposals designed to relax the ban on UK beef exports.

The Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Dr. John Cunningham)

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for this opportunity to inform the House of developments.

The terms of the Florence agreement for lifting the export ban on British beef provided for a number of steps, including on meat from animals in certified herds. It envisaged that the proposals would be first considered by the Commission's scientific advisory committee before the Commission made changes to the European Union legislation.

On 25 February this year, the previous United Kingdom Government submitted their proposals for a certified herds scheme to the Commission, which passed them to the Scientific Veterinary Committee for an opinion. The committee delivered its opinion yesterday and expressed concern on five points relating to the identification of animals, the tracing of animals on farms and of their meat through the slaughterhouse, and the amount of veterinary supervision involved. The committee suggested that changes needed to be made to the UK proposals before they would be acceptable.

It is disappointing that the Scientific Veterinary Committee has asked for further clarification when it did not take up our offer to send an expert to explain our proposals at an earlier stage in the process. We are not surprised that it has some criticisms. We are already considering carefully the points made and will give a detailed technical response very soon. Our officials are in Brussels today, and discussions will continue over the next few days.

We recognise that all consumers will be anxious for full assurances, in line with sound scientific assessments of risk. We shall press for the removal of the ban where those assurances can be given. I shall keep the House fully informed of developments.

Sir Teddy Taylor

Does the Minister accept that, as the Government's endeavour to resolve the bovine spongiform encephalopathy crisis by making an offer of providing independent advice was rejected, despite the new positive approach and the lack of confrontation, we have simply had another slap in the face based on wholly irrational arguments, such as the definition of a herd? Has not the time come for the Government to impose restrictions, under article 36, on imports from nations whose standards of safety are lower than ours?

Will the Minister endeavour to persuade his colleagues in Europe that the real problem, which will have to be overcome somehow, discussed and faced up to, is the appalling, horrendous over-production of beef in Europe, which costs the taxpayer a fortune, which it is estimated will produce about 2 million tonnes of surplus by the end of the decade and which produces no benefit to anyone? Does the Minister accept that, despite all his hard work and despite the Government's endeavours for non-confrontation and friendship, they have simply had another slap in the face? They should do something now.

Dr. Cunningham

There are three substantive points in what the hon. Gentleman has very fairly put to me. I never anticipated that I would be able to undo in five weeks all the disastrous misjudgments on the issue by the previous Government over the past five years. The proposals were, after all, submitted by the hon. Gentleman's own Government and not by me. I decided, however, that it was proper and sensible to proceed with those proposals because of the consequences of the beef ban for the whole of the United Kingdom and for our beef industry. Whatever progress I can make, I shall endeavour to make on the basis of those and new proposals that I am formulating.

I do not regard this as a slap in the face. I have had two perfectly rational conversations today with Commissioner Bonino and Commissioner Fischler about very quickly trying to resolve the outstanding questions. There is no row going on. It is perfectly reasonable for the independent Scientific Veterinary Committee—this is not a Commission decision—to raise some questions about these important matters. We shall do our best to answer those questions quickly and fully.

The hon. Gentleman made a point about the beef regime in Europe. Of course I agree with him about that. Most, if not all, parties in the House recognise that we need fundamental reform of the common agricultural policy, including the beef regime.

Mrs. Gwyneth Dunwoody (Crewe and Nantwich)

Does my right hon. Friend accept that as British consumers have accepted that beef from pedigree herds is perfectly safe and are increasingly buying it, it would be criminally unjust if farmers who have pedigree herds, in England and in other parts of the United Kingdom, were made to pay for a point of view that is not scientifically based and is totally unacceptable? To push people into bankruptcy on that basis would be totally unacceptable.

Dr. Cunningham

It is very difficult to argue that the opinions of an independent scientific committee of experts are not scientifically based. Those people were appointed to advise the Commission exactly because of their independent scientific status. Of course I agree with my hon. Friend that we should do everything possible to ensure that, where we can develop an effective certified herds scheme, our own beef producers are able to take advantage of it.

I also agree with my hon. Friend on the point about consumers being given the same levels of protection. It is exactly for that reason that I announced last week that I was not prepared to countenance indefinitely imports of beef to Britain from countries where BSE existed, unless that beef was subject to the same stringent safeguards as beef produced in this country.

Mr. Tim Boswell (Daventry)

Does the Minister accept that his response will be a grave disappointment to the House and to beef farmers, including myself? Is he aware of the current state of the beef market and of the desperate anxiety felt by many farmers? Has he naught to offer for their comfort today? Does he not feel, in all humility, just a little chastened by the revelation that warm words and soundbites will not in themselves get us all we want in Europe?

Does the Minister accept that the certified herds scheme, developed by my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Sleaford and North Hykeham (Mr. Hogg), was well founded and based on the best scientific advice? In spite of that setback, will the Minister press on with the selective cull scheme?

Does the Minister also accept from the Conservative Benches the assurance that we shall support any reasonable supplementary measures that he now proposes, including those related to maternal transmission, which are based on scientific studies initiated during our time in office? In particular, will he clarify the position on the implications of any redefinition of cohort groups for revisits to herds for which the selective cull has already been completed?

Finally, will the Minister bear it in mind that, although the House will accept measures based on scientific judgment and taken in good faith to lift the export ban, we cannot be forced beyond that? Does he agree that the ban has never had any sound legal basis? Will he confirm that he will vigorously prosecute our current legal case in the European Court?

Dr. Cunningham

In view of the diatribe at the start of the hon. Gentleman's question, his use of the word "humility" in respect of the Government is rather misplaced. A little humility on the Conservative Benches would not come amiss, given their Government's responsibility for the scandal of the development of BSE in Britain and its consequences for all our beef producers and dairy farmers. The hon. Gentleman is ill placed to champion the rights of farmers, given the abysmal record of the Conservative Government and of his right hon. and hon. Friends on the issue.

Of course we are pressing ahead with the selective cull, the over-30-months scheme and other such matters, but we would have been better placed had the Conservative Government started the selective cull when they should have, rather than delaying it until the early weeks of this year. Right hon. and hon. Members on both sides of the House will recall the former Prime Minister and the former Foreign Secretary returning from Florence and promising that, as a result of their negotiations, the beef ban would be lifted by November 1996. What a fraud that was.

Mr. Martyn Jones (Clwyd, South)

Is not the real problem that the certified herds scheme that the previous Government submitted to the Commission was inherently flawed? Will my right hon. Friend produce proposals as soon as possible to satisfy scientists, consumers and farmers alike?

Dr. Cunningham

Yes. I agree with my hon. Friend. Some weaknesses in the scheme have been identified and officials from MAFF are today discussing how we can improve the scheme and get it accepted. I want to persevere with the scheme. It is basically a good idea to have certified herds qualifying to export their beef. I see no sense in abandoning the scheme simply because one or two problems have been identified. We shall press ahead with trying to resolve them.

As I said, I have spoken with both the Commissioners involved today. They want to help us resolve the difficulties and I am hopeful that we can make rapid progress. We do so in the interests first and foremost of the beef farmers and beef producers, secondly, in the interests of British consumers and thirdly, in the interests of our economy. We want to end the beef ban.

Mr. Paul Tyler (North Cornwall)

Does the Minister accept that beef farmers throughout Scotland, Wales and England are now facing serious problems as a cumulative result of the dire consequences of mismanagement over that period, mostly under Conservative rule—[Interruption.] It was 13 and a half months. Does the Minister accept that the critical issue now is not whether we can open the export door again, but whether we can achieve some harmonisation of standards throughout the single market so that the certified herds scheme, specified bovine offals and all the other controls to which the British public are entitled to look as an assurance of public safety are applied to all exports throughout the so-called single market? Is it not about time for real action to be taken to deal with imports from countries elsewhere in the European Union and outside it, which cannot reach those standards?

Is it not a fact that the previous Government took no action whatever to deal with the problem, no doubt because they were only too pleased that their friends in the food processing industry—including the burger chains—were able to import beef of low standard at low cost? Is it not critical now to assure the British people that all the beef that is available in Britain is of the same standard as that on which we insist here?

Dr. Cunningham

I accept no responsibility on the part of the Government for the circumstances that prevail in the British beef industry today. The hon. Gentleman said that they were mostly the responsibility of the previous Administration, but they are totally the responsibility of the previous Administration. There is no doubt about that.

I shall deal with the hon. Gentleman's specific points. Of course I want to see the same rules applied on specified risk materials across the European Union as a whole. That was the purpose of the announcement that I made last week on imports of beef to Britain. I have raised the matter with the Commissioners and with the president of the Agriculture Council, Mr. Van Aartsen. I have made it clear to them that I expect them to pursue the proposals which, to be fair, Franz Fischler has retabled for the Commission's consideration.

As I am a reasonable person in these matters, I have said that I shall give them until 22 July—the date of the next Agriculture Council—to make a decision on that point. If they have not made a decision by then, the draft orders to take action against beef imports that have not been given the same rigorous treatment as our own will be tabled. Those draft orders are on my desk now.

Mr. George Stevenson (Stoke-on-Trent, South)

Does my right hon. Friend agree that, while he makes and continues to make vigorous efforts to have the export ban lifted, it would be wrong for him to make the same mistake that the right hon. Member for Huntingdon (Mr. Major) made when he announced in the House that the ban would be lifted on 20 November last year? Does he also agree that one of the problems identified by the committee is that of identifying animals both on and off the farm? Will he assure the House that the Government are making every effort to ensure that that problem is tackled in earnest?

Dr. Cunningham

I certainly want to avoid all the mistakes made by the previous Government in dealing with the European Union on this and other issues. There is little point in the aggressive, confrontational approach suggested by the hon. Member for Rochford and Southend, East (Sir T. Taylor), when we start not from a position of strength but from a position of considerable weakness as a result of the failures and the record of the previous Conservative Government. So I certainly do not intend to set any dates or make any claims for an early resolution to a complex and deep-seated series of problems that we have to resolve—first, the problems on specified risk materials, secondly, the problems of confidence in the consumer market, and, last but not least, the lack of political credibility on this issue with our European partners. None of the mistakes of the previous Government will be repeated by me.

As for my hon. Friend's last point about farm visits, thanks to the excellent work of my hon. Friend the Minister of State, we have rapidly accelerated work on the selective cull scheme, to the point at which more than 9,000 farm visits have been made. All those animals have to be traced and identified, and the farmers have to co-operate in that process. It is not an easy or uncomplicated process. We want to press on with it as quickly as we can, and we are doing so.

Mr. Tom King (Bridgwater)

Beef farmers face a serious situation at present. The Minister recently confirmed his awareness of concern about the standard of much of the imported beef coming into Britain. The Ministry has helpfully published excellent results from recent inspections of slaughterhouses, which confirm the high standard of the beef that is now produced in Britain. Are not those factors categorical grounds on which the Minister could approach McDonald's and the other major burger companies? If the lower-quality beef used in burgers were purchased in Britain, it would significantly support the beef price. How far is the right hon. Gentleman getting in his discussions with the burger companies?

Dr. Cunningham

I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for his measured and effective intervention. He is right to say that we forecast imports this year of some 160,000 metric tonnes of beef into Britain—between 20 and 25 per cent. of the beef consumed in the UK market. That is a considerable import penetration of the domestic market. I assure him that I have already approached the major importers. I am asking them not only for their advice on the matter, but whether they would like to talk to me about how we might help them to change their minds.

Mr. Peter L. Pike (Burnley)

My right hon. Friend knows the appalling cost to the nation, to farmers and to all in the meat industry of the previous Government's appalling mishandling of the matter. Can he give the current figures for BSE incidence in herds? Will he make it absolutely clear that it is the policy of his Department not to dodge the issues as the previous Government did, but to solve the problem as soon as possible?

Dr. Cunningham

My hon. Friend is right. The costs are horrendous: £1.5 billion and rising to the British taxpayer. Let me add that the previous Administration did not make sufficient provision in public expenditure to cover all the costs—just another of the little ticking time bombs that we have found in the public finances since the general election. The costs to the meat industry have also been catastrophic: some £800 million. The cost to farmers is almost incalculable. The financial consequences alone are truly horrendous.

The incidence of BSE, at the latest count on 4 June—my hon. Friend the Minister of State and I now have a weekly update of the figures—showed that there had been—[Hon. Members: "Reading".] Of course I am reading; I want to get the figure right. The figures showed that there had been 169,349 cases of BSE, which is currently running at 100 cases a week. That is a much reduced rate, but it is still much higher than in any other similarly affected country.

Mr. William Thompson (West Tyrone)

Does the right hon. Gentleman accept that this is very bad news for Northern Ireland, which exports a greater percentage of its meat than does any other part of United Kingdom? I understand that, while the overall scheme was rejected, favourable comments were made about its application—albeit with certain amendments—to Northern Ireland because of enhanced computer traceability in that part of the United Kingdom. Will the Minister insist that those amendments are made quickly and, when they are made, that the scheme be accepted for Northern Ireland, so that we can get rid of the iniquitous beef ban?

Dr. Cunningham

I accept the hon. Gentleman's point about the critical importance of the matter to Northern Ireland's economy. The hon. Member for Upper Bann (Mr. Trimble) and his colleagues came to impress that point on me only a few days ago. We had a long conversation about the impact of BSE on farmers in Northern Ireland and the considerable significance of agriculture generally to Northern Ireland's economy: 75 per cent. of beef produced there used to be exported and cannot be now.

I am very well aware of the force of the hon. Gentleman's case, but he is wrong to describe the scheme as having been rejected. The scheme has not been rejected; questions have been asked about its particulars. The questions have not even been considered by the Commissioners yet. That is why I spoke on the telephone today to both Commissioners, to ask them to help us to answer the questions expeditiously and effectively so that the scheme can be accepted.

I want to make the best progress I can in dealing with those matters, certainly in the interests of farmers in Northern Ireland, but also in the interests of farmers in the United Kingdom as a whole. I acknowledge that there has been particularly good progress in Northern Ireland on registration, the selective cull and other matters necessary to fulfil the terms of the Florence agreement. If I had not recognised that, the hon. Member for Upper Bann and his colleagues would have left me in no doubt about it.

Mr. Alan W. Williams (East Carmarthen and Dinefwr)

In line with the suggestions of the Scientific Veterinary Committee, will my right hon. Friend consider adopting a two-part strategy? First, as the hon. Member for West Tyrone (Mr. Thompson) said, he should press for an immediate lifting of the ban in Northern Ireland because of traceability. Secondly, for mainland Britain, he should work towards lifting restrictions on all cattle born after 1 August 1996, at which date we can guarantee that there was no contaminated beef. That would mean effectively a progressive lifting of the ban as those cattle reached 30 months.

Dr. Cunningham

I hope that my hon. Friend will recognise that, if I could get results simply by insisting that the ban be lifted in Northern Ireland and elsewhere, I would so insist. It is not quite that simple. As there are questions about the certified herds scheme, which apply equally to Northern Ireland as to other parts of the United Kingdom, I must answer those questions to the advantage of Northern Ireland as well as other parts of the UK. As I have said repeatedly this afternoon, I want to do that as quickly and effectively as I can. The advantage of the certified herds scheme being approved is that it would apply to the whole of the UK, including Northern Ireland.

My hon. Friend's important second point was about a birth date after which we could export beef from anywhere in the UK. I have discussed that again with Commissioners Fischler and Bonino. I raised the matter with them in May and I discussed it again with Mr. Fischler today on the telephone. We are formulating new proposals along the lines suggested by my hon. Friend, and I shall keep the House informed of progress.

Mr. John Swinney (North Tayside)

It is rather difficult to get to the nub of the Secretary of State's statement. On the one hand, he is telling us that there are one or two problems with the scheme. On the other, he is saying that he is not giving us a definitive time scale within which the ban can be lifted. Will the Secretary of State give us some definitive guidance on how swift progress will be to have the beef ban lifted? Will he consider the proposals that have long been on the table, which have been endorsed by the European Union as an opportunity for the ban to be lifted in Scotland, as a priority within the United Kingdom?

Dr. Cunningham

I do not want to fall out with anyone in the Chamber during my first appearance at the Dispatch Box in my present role in this Parliament. I say gently to the hon. Gentleman that I am not a Secretary of State but the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. Be that as it may, I am not being contradictory when I say that I want to resolve the problems as quickly as I can, but that I am not going to name a date. It would be unrealistic and misleading to do so. I have no idea how long it will take to resolve the problems. After all, the previous Prime Minister promised the nation that the entire ban would be lifted by November 1996. Here we are in June 1997 and none of the ban has been lifted.

It would be foolish in the extreme for me to start speculating about dates. I am certainly not going to raise false hopes. Perhaps that will disappoint the hon.

Gentleman and his constituents, but I recognise the nature and scale of the problems in Scotland because many of my right hon. and hon. Friends who represent Scottish constituencies, like the hon. Gentleman, have left me in no doubt about the importance of the matter to Scotland. I shall work as effectively and quickly as I can to resolve the problems, but I shall not speculate on how long that will take.

Mr. Paddy Tipping (Sherwood)

In addition to the terms of the Florence agreement, has my right hon. Friend any further proposals that will lead to the lifting of the beef ban? In particular, does he recognise that his recent comments about tightening import controls in the United Kingdom, unless common and improved standards of hygiene in slaughterhouses are introduced throughout Europe, have been widely welcomed by British beef producers?

Dr. Cunningham

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. We are looking at other possibilities for action that would help in the lifting of the ban, either in part or in whole. I have already referred to one: a birth date after which any beef produced anywhere in the United Kingdom would be eligible for export. We have to deal with the outstanding matter of the scientific evidence on maternal transmission, and we need to bring forward proposals to the Commission on that important issue. We are working on those. I shall keep the House informed on that matter.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his kind comments about the statement that I made last week. I have been quite emphatic about that statement. I want to see a European Union-wide approach to the removal of specified risk materials, but in the absence of such an approach, we shall act on our own account.

Mr. John Greenway (Ryedale)

May I offer support to the right hon. Gentleman for what he has said today about the need for the same hygiene standards and for the risk materials to be removed, having pressed that point in the House for 15 months? He will also know that I have always taken the view that this should be not a matter of dispute across the Floor of the House, but a matter between the House and this country, and the rest of the European Union.

Notwithstanding the short time that the right hon. Gentleman has been in his post, on which I congratulate him, does he not feel that, in a sense, as my hon. Friend the Member for Rochford and Southend, East (Sir T. Taylor) said at the beginning of his private notice question, all that has happened is that he has again been given a slap in the face? Indeed, it is not just him, but the British beef industry. The ban is unjustified and must be lifted without delay.

Dr. Cunningham

The hon. Gentleman started by being supportive and congratulatory, and I thank him for that, but it is no good him wagging his finger at me and saying, "The ban must be lifted without delay." I do not recall him saying that in the previous Parliament, when all sorts of false promises were being made from the Government Dispatch Box by Conservative Ministers. The hon. Gentleman is rational enough to know that there is just no hope of the ban being lifted without further delay. That is unrealistic. Much as I agree with his general point that we are doing everything that is reasonable in the circumstances, it is simply not going to happen that way.

Before I sit down, I had better apologise to the House, because I have already given some information that was not accurate. I said earlier, in answer to a question, that officials had made more than 9,000 farm visits. That is not true. We have identified more than 9,000 farm visits to be made. At the moment, 3,600 of the farms have been visited. I apologise to the House for that.

Several hon. Members

rose—

Madam Speaker

Order. I shall end this exchange. Hon. Members will find that there may very soon be a debate on these matters, and I shall remember them.