HC Deb 11 March 1999 vol 327 cc480-2
2. Mr. Andrew Love (Edmonton)

What progress he has made towards reform of the common agricultural policy in respect of environmental improvement measures; and if he will make a statement. [74078]

13. Dr. Ian Gibson (Norwich, North)

If he will report on the current negotiations on reform of the common agricultural policy, with particular reference to issues relating to environmental improvements. [74091]

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Mr. Elliot Morley)

Negotiations on the agricultural aspects of Agenda 2000 reached a conclusion early this morning. My right hon Friend the Minister hopes to make a full statement to the House tomorrow.

Mr. Love

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply and congratulate my right hon. Friend the Minister on the successful conclusion of the negotiations in Brussels. The deal has been described by the Agriculture Commissioner as the most radical reform since the inception of the CAP. It is certainly a great deal more than was done by the Conservatives during their 18 years in government. It will be good for consumers and good for the environment. What funding will be made available under the reform for agri-environmental improvements?

Mr. Morley

The agreement that has been negotiated offers benefits to consumers. The whole House will welcome that. The details on funding and the important measures in Agenda 2000 on rural development are matters for my right hon. Friend when he makes his statement tomorrow. All hon. Members will have an opportunity to ask detailed questions then.

Mr. Charles Kennedy (Ross, Skye and Inverness, West)

Does the Minister agree that the apparent shape of the package that has emerged overnight represents a considerable improvement on the position of only a week or two ago and that the National Farmers Union's description of it this morning as something of a mixed bag was probably accurate? Does he share my surprise at the comments of the Conservative spokesman, the hon. Member for South Suffolk (Mr. Yeo), who described the deal as a failure because CAP reform would cost more? No political party in any member state has ever believed that a reformed CAP would not cost more in the short term before becoming cheaper in the long term.

Given the importance of environmental improvement measures and the wider rural development strategies to which the Minister has just alluded, does he agree that the final shape of the package must maintain the essential integrity of the British family farm unit? Without that basic building block, we will not have the necessary personnel in the countryside for the environmental and other rural development programmes that we hope the eventual savings from CAP reform will help to deliver.

Mr. Morley

I agree that the impact on family farms must be taken into account in the final form of the package. I agree that it is surprising that there has been criticism of the cost of the package, because the original proposal suggested that there would be an initial increase in cost, followed by a fall. I was also surprised that the Leader of the Opposition apparently argued against the interests of consumers by criticising all aspects of the package.

Madam Speaker

I apologise to the hon. Member for Norwich, North (Dr. Gibson), whom I should have called earlier because we are dealing with his substantive question. Please put your question now, Dr. Gibson.

Dr. Gibson

Thank you, Madam Speaker. What are the Government's priorities for rural development regulation? Who will implement that regulation? Will local and regional bodies have a part to play?

Mr. Morley

I can tell my hon. Friend the Government's priorities, although the final form of the package is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Minister to outline tomorrow in his statement. We wanted a significant expansion of the agri-environment budget and support for aspects of agri-environment, including organic aid. We also wanted provision for better targeting of support in the countryside, more transparent support to the agricultural community and support for the wider rural economy, encouraging diversification.

Mr. Cynog Dafis (Ceredigion)

I wish to emphasise, as others have done, that maintaining the environment as a resource for everybody means that we have to have people on the land and in the countryside. Can the Minister confirm that yesterday's agreement on compensation made no reference to degressivity—the reduction of compensation over time? Can he also tell us what will happen in that regard at the Finance Ministers meeting on Monday? Will he take the message from us that it is terribly important that there remains sufficient support for farming to protect the family farm and to ensure that we move towards a system of environmental management payments as the basis of agricultural support?

Mr. Morley

I agree with the main thrust of the hon. Gentleman's argument. However, I am sure that he appreciates that it would be wrong for me to pre-empt my right hon. Friend's statement tomorrow.

Mr. Andrew F. Bennett (Denton and Reddish)

I am sure that my hon. Friend will agree that field boundaries are an important part of the English landscape. What money will be made available to help farmers maintain traditional boundaries? Hedges, ditches and walls are extremely expensive but very important if we are to protect the quality of the British countryside.

Mr. Morley

Field boundaries are very important to the English countryside, and agriculture has a key influence on the maintenance and enhancement of field boundaries. We already provide financial support and inducements through our countryside stewardship and environmentally sensitive area schemes. We want to enhance that through Agenda 2000. As I said, my right hon. Friend will be discussing those issues in his statement tomorrow.

Mr. Tim Yeo (South Suffolk)

We look forward to getting the details of the package from the Minister in his statement tomorrow, but is it not clear already today that the agreement is bad for the taxpayer because the cost of the CAP will rise even further than previously thought; that it is bad for consumers because the prospect of lower food prices in the shops is now even further away than was previously thought; and that it is bad for Britain's dairy farmers as the much-needed reforms will not even start for another four years.

Mr. Morley

The CAP has many disadvantages and any increase in the overall cost is bad for consumers. For that reason we were surprised that the Leader of the Opposition criticised all the main aspects of our negotiations to try to reduce consumer costs.