HL Deb 15 November 1962 vol 244 cc721-3

3.10 p.m.

LORD STONHAM

My 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, in view of the decision to dissolve the Horticultural Marketing Council, whether they will announce their proposals for the development of the Horticultural industry.]

LORD ST. OSWALD

My Lords, the Council itself recognised that, in view of the lack of support from the industry, the Government's decision to dissolve the Council was inevitable. My right honourable friend has however already welcomed the initiative of the growers, wholesalers and retailers in expressing their intent to establish a joint consultative council which may go some way to replace the Horticultural Marketing Council. He has also noted that the National Farmers' Union intend to examine the possibility of establishing a development council for the industry.

LORD STONHAM

My Lords, is it not the case that the three heads of the Government's horticultural policy—the H.M.C., which they have dissolved; Covent Garden, which will not happen, and tariffs, which they are shortly going to destroy—-have left the Government with no policy whatsoever, and the efforts which are now being started by the industry are no substitute? Will the noble Lord give an assurance that the Government will cease just trying to instruct growers how to grow their produce, and help them to find a way to distribute it at about half the cost of distribution at present?

LORD ST. OSWALD

My Lords, I think that my original Answer contained my disagreement with the noble Lord's initial premise—that is to say, that the Government were left without any agricultural policy. There are two alternative hopes in the Government's mind that may bear fruit, and we are watching to see whether they are successful. It was only with great reluctance that we saw the inevitable consequence of the failure of the industry to finance this Council that made dissolution necessary. It was always understood that after three years, during which it would be financed by the Government—and has been financed by the Government—the industry itself would have to continue the financing. They were unwilling to do so, and the result is that despite all the encouragement that the Government were able to give, this particular form of encouragement has failed and has come to nothing.

LORD WILLIAMS OF BARNBURGH

Yes, my Lords, but while we might regret the result of the recent polls, which displayed little or no enthusiasm for a central council, does the noble Lord not think, in the absence of any other policy to deal with such questions as research, inquiry, advice, education and all forms of publicity, that the Government ought now to do something instead of just waiting and watching?

LORD ST. OSWALD

No, my Lords. We are pinning our hopes on these two other possibilities, and I think that that is the best attitude we can take up at the moment.

LORD WILLIAMS OF BARNBURGH

But the noble Lord's answer is very negative. The Government are just watching. Can they not do something to help, to inspire, almost to intimidate growers, who ought to know better than they appeared to know when the last poll was taken?

LORD ST. OSWALD

My Lords, I do not think we are likely to make any attempt to intimidate the growers. All the same, I think the noble Lord will concede that our original effort to give this encouragement and inspiration failed through no fault of our own. It failed through the lack of interest of the industry itself; and what we are now hoping is that one of these two new ideas will bear fruit. We will then see whether we can give further help.

LORD WILLIAMS OF BARNBURGH

The noble Lord must not take it that I am condemning the Government for the steps they have recently taken—which, as he stated, were inevitable. But what I think the Government can do, and perhaps ought to do, is not merely to wait and watch the two new bodies that are talking about this subject, but try to inspire them to do something sensible in their own interests.

LORD ST. OSWALD

My Lords, any advice offered by the noble Lord will naturally be treated with immense respect, and I will pass it on to my right honourable friend.

VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGH

My Lords, I am much obliged for that last answer. The noble Lord did rather object to the use by my noble friend of the word "intimidation", but Mr. Heath repeated yesterday something which was said previously to agriculture in general—that is, whether you enter the Common Market or not, the present support of agriculture is bound to come to an end. That is despite previous pledges by the Government. Does that not look like intimidation?

THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL AND MINISTER FOR SCIENCE (VISCOUNT HAILSHAM)

My Lords, I think that is a somewhat wider question than that set down on the Order Paper.

LORD STONHAM

My Lords, will the noble Lord please bear in mind that the one thing the growers cannot do is to improve and cheapen the system of distribution? Will he realise that that is really the crux of the whole horticultural problem, and urge his right honourable friend to do something about that? The issue will then be all right.

LORD ST. OSWALD

In all fairness, I think I have pointed out that the efforts we made to encourage the industry to improve their methods of distribution and marketing have failed so far, due to the lack of interest of the industry, and I think we really must wait and see what they produce on their own, and then see where, if at all, we are able to help them.