HORTICULTURE (APPLE AND PEAR GROWERS) (SPECIAL PAYMENTS) (VARIATION) SCHEME 1975 (Hansard, 22 January 1976)

§ Lord STRABOLGI
My Lords, I beg to move that the Horticulture (Apple and Pear Growers) (Special Payments) (Variation) Scheme 1975, laid before the House on 11th December, be approved.
This variation scheme is made under the Horticulture (Special Payments) Act 1974. It brings into effect new rates of payment for the grubbing of apple and pear trees under the scheme. These new rates are equivalent to the latest standard costs for grubbing under the Ministry's capital grant schemes. These costs were recently revised and came into effect on 15th December. The payment under the Apple and Pear Growers (Special Payments) Scheme consists of two parts: first, the special payment itself, which varies according to the girth, type and density of the trees, and, secondly, a payment related to the costs of grubbing, which varies according to the girth of the trees. It is the latter payment that is to be increased by this order.
The Government of the day introduced a Special Payments Scheme because it was considered that some growers of apples and pears might find their production uneconomic after our accession to the EEC. Before our entry into the Community, our market was protected by import quotas for apples and pears. These were replaced by compensatory amounts which act as import levies and export refunds and are due to be phased out during transition. They are not, however, as restrictive as the former import quotas. In addition, France and Italy enjoy a climatic advantage which leads to higher yields than are possible in this country.
A grower wishing to grub his trees under this scheme must agree to remove his entire area of at least one of the three eligible categories of trees, which are dessert apples, culinary apples or pears. Cider apples and perry pears are excluded from the scheme. The grower must have been in commercial production with at least five acres of one of the categories to be grubbed on 1st July 1970, and at the time of application. 664 Apple and pear growing must constitute at least one third of the activity of the business, which for the three years ended 31st March 1973 must have yielded a sufficient livelihood to the person carrying it on. An application must also relate to at least five acres of one of the eligible categories and the land not replanted with trees of any eligible category for five years. The land must also remain in agricultural use.
We consider it encouraging that so far few growers have thought it necessary to apply under the Scheme. Up to November last year in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, only 56 proposals had been approved since the original Scheme began in August 1973. These involve some 2,400 acres at an average payment of about£165 an acre. Although the Scheme closes for applications on 31st July 1976, successful applicants will have up to one year after approval to complete their grubbing and they will be able to benefit from these higher grubbing rates. I commend the Scheme to your Lordships and I beg to move.

§ Lord SANDYS
My Lords, the House will be grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Strabolgi, for giving details of this order, with which we on this side of the House thoroughly agree and of which we approve. It will be well known, from the Government White Paper Food From Our Own Resources, Cmnd. 6020, that the overall strategy for horticulture envisages changes in certain horticultural products. We assume that the intention of the Government in bringing forward this order is to sustain horticultural growth as a whole and to permit the renewal of a good stock of trees in the United Kingdom.
There are two questions I should like to ask the noble Lord and they both relate to the situation after grubbing. First, approximately how many acres is it anticipated should be grubbed and what incentives will there be in the Government's strategy for small growers to take their areas so grubbed into a new form of production? We read with interest what the Government's intentions 665 are in the level of horticultural increase by 1980 and we see in Table 2 of the same White Paper a proposed increase of 5 per cent. We assume that this fits in with the overall strategy and I should like confirmation from the noble Lord to that effect.

§ Lord STRABOLGI
My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Sandys, for the welcome that he has given to this Scheme. I believe in many ways we are carrying on the good work initiated by his Government. The noble Lord asked what would happen to land after the orchard has been grubbed. From the available evidence on completed schemes it is clear that the great majority of applications under the Special Payments Scheme have come from mixed holdings and it seems likely that the released land will be taken up by one or other of the owner's existing activities. We have some information on the use to which applicants so far have intended to put their land; the majority intend to put it to cereals and the remainder either to grass or to cider apples.
With regard to the aids available to those who have grubbed, to help them to make full use of this released land, of course growers who have taken advantage of the Special Payments Scheme can apply for grants towards the cost of investments, which will help to make full use of the released land under two schemes made in accordance with the EEC Directive 72/159 on farm structure. The Directive sets maximum levels of aid which can be given, and the grants given in the United Kingdom are about as high as it permits.
The higher grants are available under the Farm and Horticulture Development Scheme and they attract a FEOGA contribution of 25 per cent. of the grants. They are payable on approved expenditure incurred in pursuing a development plan which is aimed at bringing the income per labour unit on a grower's holding up to a level comparable with incomes outside agriculture. Grant rates for horticulturists are slightly higher than those for agriculturists and are at 30 per cent. for improvements to land and for buildings, except additional production buildings. The rate is 20 per cent. for most plant and equipment and 10 per cent. for additional production buildings and minor cultivation equipment.
666 There is also, of course, our own national scheme as an alternative. This is the Horticultural Capital Grants Scheme which does not require an approved development plan; the rates of grant are 25 per cent. of approved expenditure on land improvements or buildings (other than additional production buildings) and 15 per cent. on most plant and equipment. The costs of this Scheme authorised under the EEC Directive to which I have referred are met entirely from national funds. I am afraid I cannot say whether or not there will be a slight upswing before the closing of the Scheme, but so far only 2½ per cent. of the eligible land has been grubbed. I hope that answers the points raised by the noble Lord, Lord Sandys.