§ THE JOINT PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE, FISHERIES AND FOOD (EARL WALDEGRAVE) rose to move that the Ploughing Grants Scheme, 1959, be approved. The noble Earl said: My Lords, it is proposed to make the Ploughing Grants Schemes for 1959 in the same terms as the 1957 and 1958 Schemes, subject only to the necessary advancement of dates. Your Lordships will remember that in the 1957 Scheme we abolished the provision whereby the Minister's prior approval was needed for direct re-seeding to grass, and the qualifying date for old grassland ploughed up under the Scheme was brought forward from May 4, 1939, to June 1, 1946. There have been no other changes and we do not propose to alter the scheme this year.
448§ Your Lordships may wish me to say just a few words about the recommendations of the Caine Committee on Grassland Utilisation in so far as they concern the ploughing grants. That Committee were in favour of ploughing grants generally but suggested that there should be certain modifications in the scheme of grant aid. They suggested, among other things, an intermediate grant of £10 per acre if a person does not qualify for the full £12 scheme. They further recommended that the requirement as to the extra cost of ploughing for the higher rate should be dropped.
§ We have considered these recommendations very carefully, but we have not felt able to accept them. I do not wish to be misunderstood. The Committee's Report as a whole is still being studied and I am referring only to the section on ploughing grants, to which we gave urgent consideration, because it had to be taken into consideration before the Annual Review. We expect that the Scheme for this year will cost between £9 and £10 million for the United Kingdom, and this figure will include about £6 million for England and Wales—very much the same as last year.
§ It has been said in another place and elsewhere that we ought seriously to consider whether this Scheme should continue for many more years. Your Lordships will be interested to learn that the Agricultural Departments have twice carried out a careful review of these ploughing grants—we had one in 1956 and again last November after receiving the Caine Report. We shall continue to keep the ploughing grants under review, but I can assure your Lordships that we have not simply gone on renewing them automatically from year to year. We are satisfied that the Scheme should be continued for the present. It finds favour with our technical advisers, and we have incorporated the same principle on ploughing-up of land from grass under the Small Farmer Scheme, which is geared to the Ploughing Grants Scheme to a considerable extent. Apart from that, we feel that there are definite advanvantages, particularly for the smaller farmer, in making these payments at the beginning of the production cycle, before a farmer receives the proceeds from the sale of his crops or end products. My Lords, I beg to move.
449§ Moved, That the Ploughing Grants Scheme, 1959, be approved.—(Earl Waldegrave.)
§ 3.14 p.m.
§ LORD WISEMy Lords, from this side of the House I should like to say that we approve this particular Scheme. As the noble Earl has said, it seems to follow upon the Scheme which has been in operation during the past year, and for that reason I think it is desirable that we should pass it to-day: it will be of advantage. I should like to ask a question on one part of the Scheme, but first of all would it be possible for the Minister to say whether the Scheme will receive the Royal Assent later to-day, or will the Royal Assent be received when we return after the Recess?
EARL WALDEGRAVEMy Lords, I do not think this Scheme requires the Royal Assent at all. It is an Order, not a Bill.
§ LORD WISEIf that is so, I am rather troubled about the wording in paragraph 7 (3) of Part II. Is the wording there in order? The noble Earl will see that in that particular sub-paragraph these words appear:
As respects land on which any such operations as aforesaid have been begun within the period beginning with the 1st day of June, 1959 "—that date we have not yet reached—and ending with the date on which this scheme was made.Could the noble Earl tell me whether the passing of this Order to-day means that the Scheme is made to-day or later? If it is made to-day, we have not yet arrived at June 1, and it seems to me, therefore, that the wording may be misconstrued if the Scheme is made on the day on which we pass the Order. I understand that it has already passed through another place and if the Scheme becomes operative as from to-day, then there is bound to be some difficulty.
EARL WALDEGR AVEMy Lords, I could have wished that the noble Lord had given me notice of that technical drafting question. I understand that this Scheme will come into force as and when it has been made. It has been passed in another place and it will come into force when it has been made to-day. It may be of some comfort to the noble 450 Lord to know that the wording of this Order is exactly the same every year. The only alteration has been in regard to the date, from "1958" to "1959". I do not know that it can be wrong this year if it was not wrong in previous years. That may not be the right answer.
§ LORD WISEMay I suggest that it was not noticed previously? It seems to me that this particular wording is somewhat difficult, as we have not yet arrived at June 1.
§ THE EARL OF SWINTONMy Lords, is not the simple answer that the Scheme has run on year after year, and that the old Scheme runs on until the new one comes into operation; so that any of us who plough, at whatever time we plough, will get the necessary grant
§ VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGHMy Lords, the conditions of Part II are entirely different from those in the existing Scheme.
EARL WALDEGRAVEI think this will be all right. I think that the noble Earl, Lord Swinton, has helped me a good deal, and that this Scheme will come into force when it is signed by the Minister. Perhaps we had better see that the Minister does not sign it until June 1. I think that really covers the point.
§ VISCOUNT BRENTFORDMy Lords, may I ask the noble Earl one question, not so much about the details of the scheme as about the way in which it has been presented to us. I think the point which we have just been discussing concerns the avoidance of an overlap so as to preclude the possibility of anyone applying for two grants in respect of one ploughing-up operation. But in regard to the question of the presentation, as the noble Earl has said, this Scheme has gone on for a number of years and is relied upon by farmers in the planning operations which they make in regard to the farms of the future. The noble Earl stressed the point that it has twice recently been under review by the Government. Could he give us an assurance that it is not the Government's immediate intention to bring the Scheme to an end, because that would seriously prejudice the general planning of operations by farmers upon farms?
EARL WALDEGRAVEMy Lords, if I may, by leave of the House, speak again, I am sure I can give the assurance that the noble Viscount requires. There is no intention to abolish this type of production grant at all. But we are nicely balanced between two points here. We shall not go on automatically renewing it year by year without consideration, and without looking at it most carefully to see whether the terms of the Scheme can, from our experience, be better dealt with from one year to another. We shall certainly take great care to go into the whole thing. This year we had the Report of Sir Sidney Caine's Committee on the Utilisation of Grassland, and naturally we had to think most carefully in regard to the recommendations that have been made.
§ LORD STONHAMMy Lords, may I ask the noble Earl a question on a slightly different point? He mentioned that the Government have not accepted the Caine Report in so far as ploughing-up grants are concerned, and they have not yet reached a decision on other aspects of that Report. Is there any way of indicating when those other aspects of the Report are likely to be considered, and when the Government will be prepared to announce their decision on the remainder of the Caine Report?
EARL WALDEGRAVEMy Lords, I am afraid that I cannot answer either of those questions without notice. I do not know when the Government will be able to announce the decision on the general recommendations of the Caine Report, and I cannot say at all which of the recommendations will be accepted and which will be rejected.
§ On Question, Motion agreed to.