§ 2.43 p.m.
§ LORD NUGENT OF GUILDFORDMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government to state the following United Kingdom statistics:
- 1. the total of farm overdrafts to the latest date available compared with a similar total for 1964;
- 2. the net income of the farming industry for 1968–69 compared with a similar total for 1964–65;
- 3. the average increase in national earnings per head during that five-year period.]
§ LORD BESWICKMy Lords, figures for the amounts of farm overdrafts are not separately available but are included in those for- total bank lending to agriculture and forestry. These amounted to £556 million for the United Kingdom at mid-August, 1969, and £512 million at mid-August, 1964. The figures are not precisely comparable owing to a change of basis.
Aggregate farming income in the United Kingdom for 1968–69 was forecast at the Annual Review 1969 at £477 million, and was £472½ million in 1964–65.
Figures of actual increases in national earnings per head are not available but the index of the average earnings of all employees for Great Britain, published in the Monthly Digest of Statistics, shows an increase of 28 per cent. between 1964 and 1968.
§ LORD NUGENT OF GUILDFORDMy Lords, I thank the noble Lord, Lord Beswick, for those statistics. Is he aware that they show a picture of the farming industry's income being relatively static, 1103 in fact slightly down, over this five-year period, while for the rest of the community earnings have risen sharply by 28 par cent.; and at the same time farmers have had to go, at any rate, slightly more into indebtedness with the banks in order to keep going? Is the noble Lord aware that at the present time there is a widespread sense of grievance among the farming community that while their record of production has been good in their average increase year by year, not only have they received no reward but in fact in real terms their actual earnings are worth less than they were five years ago? Would the noble Lord say what action Her Majesty's Government are prepared to take to give the farmers a fair crack of the whip?
§ LORD BESWICKMy Lords, I understand the noble Lord's concern to get metaphorically in step with the demonstrators, but I think he has been over-selective in his choice of questions. He has taken 1964, with its abnormally fine summer, to compare with 1968, which, as we all remember, was an abnormally bad year for farming. Moreover, even worse, he compares the total farming income of the country with earnings per head of the nation as a whole. As he knows, the number of farmers is reducing each year by something like 5,000, so that although the total income is slightly less it is shared among fewer farmers.
§ LORD BELSTEADMy Lords, in view of the figures the noble Lord has given, and in view of the fact that there are obviously limits placed on borrowing by farmers, where is the money to come from to finance the "Neddie" expansion scheme proclaimed last year?
§ LORD BESWICKMy Lords, one would like to see it come from income. I shall answer the noble Lord, Lord Belstead, by answering the latter part of Lord Nugent's supplementary. In so far as there is any justification for the criticism the noble Lord extracts from these figures, I can assure him that my right honourable friend the Minister of Agriculture will be as keen as both noble Lords opposite to ensure that these facts are considered when discussions start on the next Review.
§ LORD LEATHERLANDMy Lords, does not my noble friend think that these 1104 figures would be more complete and convey a truer picture if they also took account of the vast appreciation that has taken place in the land values of farm holdings? Is he aware that a public authority with which I am connected have recently had to pay £21,000 an acre for land which the night before was valued at less than £300 an acre?
§ LORD BESWICKMy Lords, I am very grateful for my noble friend's help, but I fear that the figures could he twisted the other side, because the trouble is that certain farmers have to pay these enhanced values and make their farms pay on the basis of increased capital overheads.
EARL FERRERSMy Lords, while I accept part of what the noble Lord said in answer to the Question, would he be kind enough to answer my noble friend's supplementary, which was: what action do Her Majesty's Government intend to take to rectify the appalling state of affairs shown by the figures the noble Lord gave?
§ LORD BESWICKMy Lords, first, I would say what action the Government do not intend to take. They do not intend to take the advice of noble Lords opposite and wreck the present system of agriculture prices. Had we followed the advice which has been tendered from the other side over the last two or three years, the farming community all over the country would now be marching. My answer to the noble Lord was that the financing of farming next year, one would hope, would be possible to a greater extent out of income, and I have said that is a factor which must be considered when the Review takes place next year.
§ VISCOUNT MASSEREENE AND FERRARDMy Lords, having regard to the extremely heavy bank overdrafts of the farming community, would the noble Lord take note of the example of France? Could he impress upon his right honourable friend the need to arrange easier bank interest terms for farmers in this country as I understand is done in France?
§ LORD BESWICKMy Lords, far be it from me to criticise what is happening in France, but I doubt whether there is any farmer who has watched events in France, with the surpluses building 1105 up, who will want to emulate what is being done in that country.
§ LORD NUGENT OF GUILDFORDMy Lords, may I ask the noble Lord whether he is aware that his criticism of the years which I chose is not entirely apt? I chose those years because those are the years for which the noble Lord is responsible. His point about the reduction in the number of farmers is certainly a point to be taken, but even if that is allowed for, the position of farmers' incomes is woefully out of step with the increase in incomes of the rest of the community. Also, is the noble Lord aware that if Government policy continues to hold back farmers' incomes in this way it is bound to have a longterm depressing effect on the industry's capacity to produce the food we want?
§ LORD BESWICKMy Lords, I myself doubt very much whether what was produced in the year 1964–65 was due to what happened under a Labour Government which took office only that year. I think crops are sown rather earlier than that. I think a fairer comparison would have been with the moving three-year trend from 1964–65 to 1967–68. If you look at those figures, you find an increase from £446½ million to £491 million. But I do not wish to make too much of these figures. I agree with the noble Lord that there is scope for looking at the whole business again and trying to ensure that the farmers are getting a fair share of what they produce. I accept that. May I say this to the noble Lord? I think he would be mistaken if he were to press his criticism any further and upset the confidence of the farming community, which is really vital if we are to increase production.
EARL FERRERSMy Lords, that being so, when do the Government intend to look at this again—before the Price Review?
§ LORD BESWICKMy Lords, the noble Earl knows the timetable. The discussions will be starting very soon after Christmas.
LORD ST. OSWALDMy Lords, may I put the question already put to the noble Lord by his noble friend behind him in slightly different terms? I did not understand the answer. Is the noble 1106 Lord aware of any general rise in values of agricultural land during the past five years?
§ LORD BESWICKMy Lords, I speak here from general knowledge, and I cannot give actual cases.
§ LORD BESWICKI should have thought in general, yes.
THE LORD PRIVY SEAL (LORD SHACK LETON)My Lords, I wonder whether your Lordships would like to bring this debate to an end. We have another debate to follow.