§ 4. Mrs. Maria Fyfe (Glasgow, Maryhill)What assessment he has made of the potential benefit to the economies of developing nations through the promotion and recognition of fair trade principles in the export of bananas. [51688]
§ The Minister of State, Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Mr. Jeff Rooker)Fair trade bananas may have a part to play in strengthening the 516 economies of developing countries. As part of the successful negotiations on the EU's banana regime which the previous Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, my right hon. Friend the Member for Copeland (Dr. Cunningham), recently chaired in Luxembourg, the Commission has agreed to bring forward a communication and a proposal on fair trade bananas by 1 March next year.
§ Mrs. FyfeI thank my hon. Friend. What progress is being made in fulfilling our Lomé convention commitments? Does he agree that the purchase of fair trade bananas in our supermarkets and food shops ought to be encouraged, for the good of both our children and developing countries?
§ Mr. RookerMy hon. Friend will be aware that the banana is the highest-selling fruit in this country, averaging two per person per week—a substantial number. As regards the question of third-world countries, the deal that was successfully concluded at Luxembourg fully meets this country's commitments under the Lomé convention and, we believe, our World Trade Organisation obligations—not every other country on the planet takes that view.
§ Mr. Bowen Wells (Hertford and Stortford)Will the Minister confirm that the agreement on fair trade bananas—which is welcome—is not WTO-compatible in two respects? First, the quota is not agreed within the WTO, and is therefore subject to challenge; it is likely to be challenged by the United States and countries from central America. Secondly, the agreement under which bananas can be imported into Europe under WTO waiver ends in 2002, and this agreement is designed to run to 2004. Therefore, an extension of the WTO waiver will be necessary.
§ Mr. RookerThe hon. Gentleman is right on the latter point. On his former point, we are disappointed that the United States continues to take a confrontational stand on the issue. We sincerely hope that, following mature consideration and a look at what was agreed, the United States will see that we have found what we consider to be a reasonable way in which to honour our international obligations.
§ Ms Jean Corston (Bristol, East)Does my hon. Friend agree that the description of the future of the banana industry as being between straight and curved bananas is a gross caricature? There are two large problems here: one is the British consumer preference for the smaller, Caribbean banana, and the second is the desire of former colonial territories—particularly in Africa and the Caribbean—for trade rather than aid. However, countries such as the Windward Islands in particular cannot compete with the same economies of scale against the large multinationals operating in central America, such as Dole and Chiquita. They look to the British Government and the EU to provide fair trade.
§ Mr. RookerAs former colonial powers, we and some of our European partners have a moral obligation to ensure that the economies of the African, Caribbean and Pacific countries are not wrecked by other forces. The United States is not a banana grower, but it has close 517 relations with Latin American countries that are. Companies such as those that my hon. Friend mentioned gave some countries the name of banana republic. I will not go into the reasons for that. We would prefer trade and not aid, and so would those countries. It would be wholly unacceptable for Caribbean countries' economies to be wrecked—which is a possibility—and for them to be forced to grow cash crops.