§ 2. Mr. Gordon PrenticeTo ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what was the largest payment made to a single landowner under the set-aside regime for the latest year for which figures are available. [2891]
§ The Minister of State, Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Mr. Jeff Rooker)The precise answer to my hon. Friend's question about the set-aside land is £230,082, which formed part of a larger payment—in 1996, under the arable area payments scheme—of £2,007,993.
§ Mr. PrenticeDoes not that answer simply illustrate how grotesque and indefensible the set-aside scheme is? Farmers—grain barons—can receive thousands of pounds for not growing crops, while hill farmers, for example, struggle to eke out a living. Is there not a compelling case for getting rid of set-aside and production subsidies, and putting the money where it is needed—into environmental schemes and rural communities, and rebuilding our countryside?
§ Mr. RookerMy right hon. Friend the Minister will be pressing next week for precisely that. I repeat that the amount paid for set-aside, for not using land, was some 10 per cent. of the total payment to the landowners concerned.
§ Mr. GreenwayDoes the Minister agree that there are many large estates and that much of this money supports employment which might not otherwise be retained? May we have an assurance right at the beginning of the Government's term of office that in the common agricultural policy reform negotiations the Government will have nothing whatever to do with arguments about modulation and that there will be no discrimination against British farmers because of the size of those farms?
§ Mr. RookerWe are not in favour of modulation, but no one can convince me that spending more than £1.1 billion on the arable area system is a job creation scheme. I reject that. Only £138 million of that amount is in respect of land that is set aside and not used.