§ 2.43 p.m.
§ LORD WISEMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the first Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they will state the total amounts of deficiency payments for cattle, sheep and pigs respectively made through (a) the live-weight centres and (b) the dead-weight centres during 1959.]
THE JOINT PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE, FISHERIES AND FOOD (EARL WALDEGRAVE)My Lords, the deficiency payments on cattle, sheep and pigs certified in the United Kingdom during the calendar year 1959 totalled—and I will give the figures in millions of pounds: cattle, £3.1 live-weight, £0.7 dead-weight; sheep, £20.4 live-weight, £7.4 dead-weight; pigs, £4.5 live-weight, £15.8 dead-weight.
§ LORD WISEMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the second Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government whether the full amounts of correct 1103 deficiency payments made to the dead-weight centres were, in fact, received by the senders of stock to those centres in 1959, and, if not, whether steps will be taken to make certain that the correct deficiency payments for the period in which the stock reached the centres will be paid direct to the senders in future by the appropriate department of the Ministry concerned, as is done for stock passing through the live-weight centres.]
EARL WALDEGRAVEMy Lords, many producers who send stock to dead-weight centres prefer to sell at inclusive prices, which take account of the guarantees, leaving it to the buyers to present the stock for certification and claim the guarantee payment. The guarantee arrangements make provision for this. I cannot say whether the full amount of the guarantee payment is passed on in every such transaction, but any producer is entitled to sell his stock at the market price and claim the guarantee payment himself if he prefers to do so.
§ LORD WISEMy Lords, while thanking the noble Earl for his Answer to the Question, is it not the fact that, according to the Agriculture Act, 1957, and to the Orders made in 1957 and 1958 with reference to it, the producer or the sender of the stock to the dead-weight centres is the person entitled to receive the payment, as indeed he does when his stock is sent to the live-weight centres? And cannot the Government institute a system whereby the sender of the stock, either live or in carcase form, can receive the deficiency payment to which he is entitled under the Act and the Orders?
EARL WALDEGRAVEYes, my Lords, but this is precisely what happens. It is the sender of the stock, the person who presents the stock to the certification centre, who gets the deficiency payment. But that sender may not necessarily be the first producer, the farmer. It may be his agent; it may be the wholesaler to whom he has sold; it may be the Fatstock Marketing Corporation. Under the Fatstock (Guarantee Payments) Order, 1957, the "producer" for the purpose of guarantee payments, is defined as the person in whose name the fatstock are presented for certification.
§ VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGHMy Lords, it seems clear, from both the Question and the Answers, that there is a great danger here that in many cases the people who carry out the slaughter and are the final receivers of the subsidy are making a profit on the subsidy itself: that, by the arrangements that have to be gone through, there are leaks. Surely the whole idea of the Government, in giving a subsidy, is to see that the producer gets something near his production costs plus a slight profit.
EARL WALDEGRAVEI cannot accept for a moment that there are any leaks here. It is entirely a matter for the producer to decide whether he himself presents the beast to a certification centre and gets two cheques, one from the auctioneer or buyer and the other from the Government, or whether he does that transaction through an agent. If he does it through an agent, the agent will be properly paid for his services. If the producers who are using agents do not think they are getting a proper amount passed on to them, they have the remedy in their own hands; they simply present the stock themselves.
§ LORD WISEBut is it not the fact that under the Government's own Order of 1957—the noble Earl read out the definition of the producer—the producer must be the sender of the stock, and that he is the person entitled to the payment? It seems to me clear throughout all the Orders that, just as you are a producer when you send to the livestock auctions and receive your cheque, so in the same way you are a producer by sending it to the dead-weight certification centre. It seems to me that as my noble Leader has said, there may be some leakage; and surely under the various Acts the man who is entitled to the deficiency payment is the sender of the stock, and not the centres.
EARL WALDEGRAVEYes, my Lords, that is exactly what I have said. The Fatstock (Guarantee Payments) Order is the one which is concerned. It is Statutory Instrument No. 370 of 1957, which defines the "producer" for the purposes of guarantee payments as the person in whose name the fatstock are presented for certification: the sender, not necessarily the rearer of the animal.
§ LORD WISEI am not arguing that it is the rearer. I want the sender to get the money and not the processors or the other people who deal with the carcases.
§ VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGHBut he does not get it all.
§ LORD WISEMight I then ask whether, under these same Orders, the Government take any steps to investigate or inspect the records and the books of these live-weight centres?
EARL WALDEGRAVEMy Lords, I really think that it would be more convenient if the noble Lord opposite, Lord Wise, and myself discussed this matter afterwards. I wonder whether I could illustrate it in this way. Suppose that I am a farmer, and that I sell an animal to another person; that that person sells the animal to a third person; that he, in turn, sells the animal to someone else; and that the last person then presents it for certification. It is the last person who gets the money for the deficiency payment. That last person may not be an individual; it may be a corporation, such as the Fatstock Marketing Corporation. The Government are absolutely satisfied that the deficiency payments due under the experiment are paid to the presenter for certification.