HC Deb 13 January 2000 vol 342 cc412-3
5. Mr. Peter Luff (Mid-Worcestershire)

If he will make a statement on the progress in talks to liberalise world trade in agricultural products. [103776]

The Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Mr. Nick Brown)

Negotiations on the further liberalisation of agricultural trade were mandated by the 1994 World Trade Organisation agreement on agriculture. The negotiations will go ahead this year in spite of the suspension in Seattle of talks on a wider round of trade negotiations. The agricultural negotiations are based on article 20 of the agreement on agriculture, which follows the Uruguay round.

Mr. Luff

I thank the Minister for that helpful clarification. Does he agree that trade liberalisation poses many challenges and threats, and offers many opportunities to United Kingdom food and farming industries? That is why the Agriculture Committee has made it one of its major subjects of inquiry in this Session. Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that there is a major threat to UK animal welfare standards? Will he give the House a reassurance that he will put at the centre of his negotiating strategy the concerns of British farmers who wish to maintain high standards of animal welfare, but risk being undercut by cheaper imports from countries with much lower standards?

Mr. Brown

As the hon. Gentleman is the Chairman of the Select Committee on Agriculture, he will know that I take animal welfare issues very seriously indeed. I have raised the point that he made at the Council of Ministers—formally, on behalf of the UK Government, and separately, in the margins, with the Commission and with other Ministers. There is a view among EU Ministers that animal welfare issues are important, but that we must protect the EU from exporting its industries. As we set higher standards internally, we must put our industries at a competitive advantage. The task for Ministers is to find a way of preserving the animal welfare polices for which we strive and of improving them, but to do so in a non-trade distorting manner.

Mr. Ian Cawsey (Brigg and Goole)

When my right hon. Friend holds negotiations on the world trade in agricultural products, will he push for a change in the classification of livestock from agricultural products to sentient beings—as has already been done in the EU? If that change were adopted worldwide, it would not only be a tremendous boost for British farmers, but would be widely supported throughout the whole country.

Mr. Brown

There are several possible ways forward. The important point is to achieve our objectives and to do so in a non-trade distorting way. The danger for the EU is that we increase standards within the EU, but find that we have exported our industries. That would be a defeat for animal welfare as well as for farmers. We are trying to avoid that.

Mr. Roger Gale (North Thanet)

The right hon. Gentleman will be fully aware that when animal welfare considerations have been raised at previous World Trade Organisation discussions, they have always eventually been used as a trade-off for issues that other people regard as more important. Will he give the House an absolute assurance that animal welfare—to UK standards—is at the top of his agenda, and that it will not be used merely as a bargaining chip for other issues?

Mr. Brown

Animal welfare is an important—indeed integral—part of the UK's agenda for these complex discussions on agricultural reform and trade liberalisations; it most certainly is not a bargaining chip for other pieces of the negotiation.